Godly union and concord : sermons preached mainly in Westminster Abbey in the interest of Christian fraternity

/Of

A

9

I

GODLY UNION AND CONCORD.

GODLY
UNION AND CONCORD

SERMONS PREACHED MAINLY IN

WESTMINSTER ABBEY IN THE INTEREST

OF CHRISTIAN FRATERNITY.

BY H. HENSLEY HENSON, B.D.

FELLOW OF ALL SOULS COLLEGE, OXFORP,
CANO* OF WESTMINSTER, AND KECTOR OF ST. MAROAKET'S, WESTMINSTER

NDON

JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET
1902

5

.„„,,«.«>»' ..*

LONDON AND

CONTENTS.

PAGE
INTRODUCTION 1— xlvii

NO.

1. THE UNCHANGING FAITH I

Westminster Abbey, January 6th, 1901.

2. THE PARADOX OF CHRISTIANITY l6

Westminster Abbey, January i$th, 1901.

3. CHRISTIAN VERSATILITY 30

Westminster Abbey, January zoth, 1901.

4. APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY ....... 45

St. Margaret's, Westminster, June $oth, 1901.

5. APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY, 1 55

St. Margaret's, Westminster, July jth, 1901.

6. APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY, II 67

St. Margaret's, Westminster, July i^tli, 1901.

7. APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY, III. 79

St. Margaret's, Westminster, July zist, 1901.

8. APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY, IV. 90

St. Margaret's, Westminster, July 2Sth, 1901.

9. APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY, V. IOI

St. Margaret's, Westminster, August 4^/1, 1901.

IO. CHURCH CONGRESS SERMON 113

All Saints, Hove, September 2gth, 1901.

vi CONTENTS.

NO. PAGE

11. AN APPEAL FOR UNITY 126

Cambridge, October 2Oth, 1901.

12. THE CHURCH VISIBLE AND INVISIBLE .... 144

Westminster Abbey, November ist, 1901.

13. CHRIST'S NEW COMMANDMENT 153

Westminster Abbey, November $nl, 1901.

14. CHRIST'S MISSION IN THE CHURCH .... 166

Westminster Abbey, November loth, 1901.

15. PROSELYTISING l8l

Westminster Abbey, November ijth, 1901.

16. SUPERSTITION 194

Westminster Abbey, November 2^th, 1901.

17. THE JUDGMENT OF CHRIST 2Og

Westminster Abbey, December ist, 1901.

T8. THE BIBLE 224

Westminster Abbey, December 8tli, 1901.

ig. APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION 239

Westminster Abbey, December i$th, 1901.

20. HOLY COMMUNION 254

Westminster Abbey, December 22nd, 1901.

21. DISCIPLESHIP 269

Westminster Abbey, December 2gtft, 1901.

INTRODUCTION.

i.

IT will be impertinent, and I think also superfluous,
to preface this volume with anything of the nature of a
personal apology : but I hold myself bound to state
frankly that, on the particular contention which has
attracted most public notice in the sermons here pub
lished, viz., the explicit repudiation of the conventional
doctrine of Apostolic Succession, I have definitely and
deliberately gone back on former declarations of my
own. Some ten years ago I wrote a letter to the Times
protesting against the action of the late Bishop of
Worcester in admitting Nonconformists to communion
at Grindelwald, and a little later I wrote to the Guardian
criticising a sermon of Archdeacon Sinclair which advo
cated a recognition of the non-episcopal Churches. I
hold myself bound to draw public attention to the fact
that I have come to think that I was wrong, and Bishop
Perowne and Archdeacon Sinclair right on those issues.
One of the wisest and best men I know once gave me
this counsel, which at the time, and often since, has
been of much service to me, " never waste your soul
in bewailing the blunders that you made honestly when
trying to do right." Therefore, while I regret giving

viii INTRODUCTION.

undeserved pain to any one, I do not regret action which
was, so far as I can judge myself, honestly directed to
what I conceived to be my duty.

It is now six years since I found myself unable to
proceed on the old assumption: and set myself to use
the comparative leisure, which, as incumbent of S. Mary's
Hospital, Ilford, I possessed, to examine, as thoroughly
as I could, the whole question of the nature and
organisation of the Christian Church. The course of
public events held me to the subject; I followed closely
the movement for securing a papal recognition of Angli
can Orders ; I read the tragedy of Dreyfus, not merely
in the English journals, but also in the columns of the
clerical press in France ; I was interested deeply in the
" crisis " in the Church. Everywhere I was being forced
back on the question of the Christian ministry, its origin'
nature, history, moral worth, actual influence.

The religious anarchy which reigns in England had
always troubled me : perhaps the circumstances of my
ministerial life have compelled me beyond my fellows to
realise its miserable consequences. When, in 1888, at the
urgent request of the late Bishop of Colchester, and with
the warmly expressed approval of the late Bishop of
S. Alban's, I left the Oxford House for the Vicarage of
Barking, I found myself in a mad world. Christianity,
which was certainly not strongly established in the
life of the people, was represented by the following
organisations : —

1. The Church of England.

2. The Roman Catholic Church.

3. The Methodists.

SECTARIANISM. ix

4. The Wesleyans.

5. The Congregationalists.

6. The General Baptists.

7. The Strict Baptists.

8. The Open Plymouth Brethren.

9. The Close Plymouth Brethren.

10. The Salvation Army.

11. Private Venture Unsectarian Mission.

12. The Peculiar People.

13. Quaker Mission.

There were other merely individual ventures, but those
I have named were organised and fairly permanent
bodies. The religious result was ruinous. I say now,
after an interval of years, what I said at the time, that
this demented sectarianism had gone far to destroy the
moral force of Christianity in the place. I am not writing
a personal apologia, or I should have much to say of
efforts made, and experiments tried, to find some remedy.
It must suffice to say broadly and briefly that the con
viction which, through conflict and failure, was formed
in my mind, and finally fixed itself, was hostile to the
common and obvious method of asserting the exclusive
Divine Right of the hierarchy, and fastened itself on the
recovery and reassertion of the Church of Christ as
essentially the organised society of His disciples.

I have made no secret of my conviction. In 1897 I
published a volume of "historical and social sermons to
general congregations,"1 in which the direction of my
thought was sufficiently indicated.

1 Light and Lta\'tn, Methuen & Co., 1897.

x INTRODUCTION.

" The evidence of Christian history," I said, " would
seem to be fatal to all rigid doctrines of an external
unity. Manifestly the graces of God have not respected
ecclesiastical theories. Heretics like Ulphilas have been
as effectual in the mission-field as their orthodox con
temporaries ; schismatics (and, indeed, heretics also),
such as, on the modern Roman doctrine, were the Irish
missionaries, were none the less abundantly blessed in
their labours. In our own day no evangelistic efforts
have been more heroic and more successful than those
of the Presbyterians. Moreover, it is manifest that
saintliness cannot be cooped up within any ecclesiastical
limits. Some systems may favour one type of moral
excellence, and some another, but all Christian systems
have proved themselves capable of producing types of
character which can be rightly called saintly. The most
arrogant and the most futile of all ecclesiastical pre
tensions is that which would claim for any church a
monopoly of saints. * * * In condemning exclusive
theories of church unity, Christian history establishes a
unity of another kind. Christianity certifies its Divine
character, not in the political sphere, by the miracle
of an immutable institution, but in the moral sphere,
by the various but accordant testimony of saintly
lives." l

A year later, in 1898, I published another volume,
Apostolic Christianity? in which I spoke with a clearness
which ought to have prevented any misconception of my

1 /. «:., p. 125.

a Apostolic Christianity : Notes and Inferences mainly based on
S. Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians. Methuen & Co., 1898.

SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES, xi

position. I shall make no scruple of transcribing the
substance of the appendix on apostolic succession,
because I can find no more apposite words to express
my present belief on that subject.

" It can hardly be disputed by any well-informed
student that the conventional Anglican teaching about
the apostolic succession is in many respects gravely
objectionable It states boldly as a fact what is at best
a probable supposition, and it is made to carry the
burden of practical inferences so serious that nothing but
the clearest and most convincing proofs could suffi
ciently commend them to the acceptance of thoughtful
Christians. It ought to be admitted that in its crude
traditional form the doctrine of apostolic succession is
subsequent to the apostolic age. Only with very large
deductions can we allow the truth of the familiar
Embertide hymn : —

"'His twelve Apostles first He made

His ministers of grace,
And they their hands on others laid
To fill in turn their place.'

" For the Apostles, strictly speaking, had no successors.
Their functions were unique and incommunicable. In
a more general sense the Christian ministry, however
designated or organised, stands in the apostolic suc
cession. The crucial question is, Have we any suffi
cient grounds for pleading apostolic authority in its
extremest, most obligatory shape for that type of
ecclesiastical order which we now call Episcopal ? That
the threefold ministry can be traced in a continuous line
to Apostolic times is now generally admitted : that any

xii INTRODUCTION.

other type of ecclesiastical order can be so traced may
be securely denied ; but though these facts do un
doubtedly confer on the Episcopal regime a prestige, a
value, and an interest which are unique, can it be
reasonably maintained that they justify the rigid and
tremendous conclusion that non-episcopal ministers are
necessarily invalid ? Since it is certain that the three
fold ministry is not absolutely coeval with the Church,
and since it is admittedly not based on any known com
mandment of Christ, can it be justly claimed that now
the threefold ministry belongs to the ' esse ' of the
Church ?

"These questions seem equally difficult and im
portant. For the higher the theory of the Church the
greater must be the authority of its permanent agree
ments, and the threefold ministry certainly represents
one of the most permanent of all such agreements. The
divine right of the ministry as certified by the episcopal
succession from the apostles was never questioned from
the second century to the sixteenth. It would seem that
to abandon a system so long standing could hardly fail
to involve the gravest spiritual consequences. But the
commentary of nearly four centuries on the Reformation
does not seem to correspond with the requirements of
the rigid episcopal theory. Christianity, it is contended,
has been most apostolic outside the apostolic succession,
most Christian outside the sphere of sacramental grace.
This is an exaggeration of facts which, exaggeration
apart, must be faced.

" There is, of course, another side to the question.
The witness of the last four centuries is by no means

EVILS OF ABSOLUTISM. xiii

uniformly favourable to ' Protestantism.' Ecclesiastical
anarchy is seen to have evils of its own scarcely less
baleful than those of hierarchic absolutism. The decay
of the Christian character through sectarian competition
and conflict is hardly less ruinous than the debasement
of the Christian life by ignorance and superstition. But
this must be allowed. The evils of Protestant anarchy
are very generally admitted, and are on the way to be
overcome. The nineteenth century is more united and
charitable than the seventeenth ; but the evils of
absolutism, at least so far as the Roman Church repre
sents absolutism, seem to grow more inveterate and
baleful. The Christianity of Southern Europe and
Southern America is perhaps less intellectual and moral
to-day than in the seventeenth century. On the whole
view of the last four centuries, I think it must be
admitted that non-episcopalian Christianity has proved
its power to stand the moral test of discipleship pro
posed by our Lord at least as well as episcopalian. Its
' fruits,' religious, social, political, intellectual, are in
disputable. We are then driven to ask, How far shall
all this affect our doctrine of apostolic succession ? Is
the ' witness of history ' valid up to the sixteenth
century and not beyond ? Is the development of the
Christian Ecclesia to be arbitrarily arrested at the second
century or the fourth ? The Roman Church seems to
stand for a truth when she answers in the negative these
questions, though her arbitrary application of the truth
she admits robs her admission of practical result. At
all hazards it would seem that a living belief in the
Church, as a divinely-inspired society, must require a

xiv INTRODUCTION.

willingness to revise past conclusions by present
experience. It seems involved in the conviction that
the Holy Spirit is continuously present in the Church,
that we should give the greatest importance to the
latest Christian experience. For that must be supposed
to reflect His most recent guidance. Definitions must
be adequate if they are to be received as true. The
strict conventional episcopalian definition of the Church
is ceasing to be adequate : the probability is that within
a few generations ft will become as patently inadequate
as the kindred Roman definition. Probably, however,
both definitions are rather lightly held. Men may be
illogical, they are rarely in large numbers consciously
absurd."

When, at the end of 1899, I resigned the Rural
Deanery of South Barking, I published and presented
as a parting gift to the clergy of the deanery, another
volume of sermons,1 in which I again expressed my
thoughts with the utmost clearness on Church questions :
and when I left Ilford for Westminster in December,
1900, I printed and presented to my congregation and
other friends two lectures on Dissent in England, which,
whatever other defects they may have possessed, did
not lie open to the charge of obscurity.

It will be sufficiently clear that the teaching of the
sermons published in this volume represents no sudden
and recent change of mind, but a continuous movement
of thought in one direction. I have, of course, no right
to complain if my books are not read : but I have every

1 Ad Rem : Thoughts for Critical Times in the Church, Wells,
Gardner, Darton & Co.

VOLUNTARY SCHOOLS. xv

reason to complain, when those who have not read my
books accuse me of something very near akin to a
breach of faith, for teaching in Westminster the same
doctrines that I have publicly advocated, by every
means in my power, for years past.

II.

The recovery of fraternity among Christians is no
matter merely of amiable sentiment, but of urgent
practical importance. It is sufficient to point to three
questions, which already hold a prominent place in
public regard, and which are surely destined to loom
more largely than any others on the national horizon —
education, poverty, foreign missions.

i. We stand on the eve of a momentous decision with
respect to our national education. The long-drawn-out
agony of the voluntary schools visibly approaches its
term. Many of those schools must perish within the
next few years, for quite intelligible reasons, because,
speaking broadly, they are educationally (I use the word
in its current meaning) inferior. They are worse housed
worse equipped, worse staffed than the board schools,
and no device can save them which attempts to retain
their voluntary character. But, none the less, these
starved and failing schools embody the true principle of
education, the only principle which thoughtful Christian
men can, in the long run, accept, the principle that the
basis and pervading tone of a sound educational system
must be Christian. It is not a question of doing justice
to the religious teaching in this or that board school.

xvi INTRODUCTION.

We all know that many board school teachers are
excellent Christians, whose influence on the children
is, in the best sense of the word, religious. In the
long run a non-Christian system will become an anti-
Christian system, and the teachers will inevitably reflect
its spirit. I believe there are very manifest signs that
the tone of the teachers is altering for the worse, and
I believe also that, unless the process can be arrested, we
shall, by the steady pressure of circumstances, find our
selves landed in a system of secular education pure and
simple. We are, as a nation, at the parting of the ways.
The fate of the voluntary schools will determine the issue
one way or the other. If, on the one hand, this miserable
dual system is to continue, the voluntary schools will
perish ignobly, one after the other, dying of inanition
and the inefficiency which inanition compels, and the
system which survives unrivalled will be essentially a
secular system. If, on the other hand, our national
education is at last to be unified, and the voluntary
schools are to be absorbed into the general system
without friction and without injustice, because the
essential principle which those schools assert, as distinct
from denominational interests which they have inci
dentally served, has at last established itself in our
national education, then a new and brighter epoch will
have begun.

What is the real difficulty in the way ? The answer
is evident. The insensate jealousies and conflicts of the
Churches will not admit of a Christian system of educa
tion. There is not a Christian parent, in any of
those Churches, who would tolerate a non-religious

POVERTY. xvii

upbringing for his own children; and his acquiescence in
a non-religious system of national education is always
conditioned in his own mind by the supposition that at
home or in Sunday School the religious element can be
supplied. But any reasonable man, who will face the
facts, knows that in the case of great multitudes of
children that vital supposition cannot be made, and
that, if the elementary schools do not provide some
moral teaching based on the Christian faith, the masses
of our poorest children will grow up morally unde
veloped, to be the danger and scandal of society. In
view of so urgent a matter, is it wholly vain to hope
that Christian men, as such, will seize the present oppor
tunity for not merely terminating an illogical and now
impracticable compromise, but also for placing the
national education on a frankly Christian basis ?

2. Of the problem of poverty we shall hear much as
soon as the war is over. Messrs. Charles Booth and Rown-
tree have drawn a frightful indictment of the Churches,
not by sensational rhetoric, but by prosaic and cruelly
accurate statistics. How is any escape to be found
from so grievous a situation as this in which, amid
abounding wealth and shameless luxury, more than one-
fourth of the nation is oppressed with literal hunger?
The only chance of any solution of the problem which
shall not plunge society itself into the unimaginable
disasters of revolution, lies in the concentration of the
public conscience on the facts, and, as a consequence,
in the sustained application of civic efforts to the task
of social improvement. The first step to these ends is
the unification of the forces of religion in the country,

G.U. b

xviii INTRODUCTION.

that is, in short, what I plead for in these sermons, the
recovery of fraternity among Christians.

3. Of foreign missions — the Christianity of the empire
— what need to speak ? Christian divisions nowhere
have a more wanton and repulsive aspect than in the
mission field, where they paralyze the labours of the
missionaries, contradict their message, and move the
scorn of the heathen.

Is it not pitiable that at such a time as this the
bishops of the English Church should meet in confer
ence, time after time, to consider, not the recovery of
Christian fraternity, but "the ritual question"? Their
lordships are but the most conspicuous victims of the
universal madness.

We come back to the question, then, What is at the
root of these obstinate divisions ? Is there any chronic
obstacle to fraternity which bars all progress towards a
happier state ? Why cannot good men, who hold the
same faith, confess allegiance to the same Lord, recog
nise the obligation of the same moral law, revere
the same Scriptures, acknowledge one another frankly
as fellow-disciples, and work together in the common
cause ?

The answer must certainly include the admission that
the exclusive claims of types of ecclesiastical order
constitute, as matters now stand in England, the most
obdurate and general stumbling-block in the way of
peace. There are two such claims being pressed among
us — the claim of a Divine-right papacy, and the claim
of a Divine-right episcopate. Both have their roots in
the same assumptions : both justify themselves by the

THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. xix

same plea of development : both necessitate the same
exclusive attitude towards all fellow Christians who
reject them : both are open to the same objections from
the standpoint of the historical student : both are equally
repugnant to the spirit of the Gospel.

Their exclusive claims being set aside, and their title
to Christian acceptance being brought to the true and
reasonable test of utility, it cannot be denied that both
these types of ecclesiastical organisation have strong
recommendations. As an episcopalian, I may be
allowed to believe that the episcopal system will approve
itself in the future, as in the past, to be the best adapted
for Christian uses : but I am very sure that nothing
could so hinder the general recognition of the fact, as
the narrow, exclusive attitude now generally adopted by
the advocates of episcopacy.

I believe the time is ripe for a re-examination of our
doctrine of the Christian ministry. Within the last few
years a great and salutary change has passed over
Anglican opinion with respect to the Holy Scriptures.
The traditional doctrine has been generally set aside in
deference to the teachings of biblical science. Is it too
much to hope that a similar change of attitude may be
effected with respect to the traditional doctrine of the
Church ? Dr. Hort, in one of his letters, makes an
observation which few serious students of ecclesiastical
history will be disposed to dispute : " Hooker's great
service was to break down the Genevan theory as to the
nature of the authority of Scripture in all Church matters.
Much of what tie said of the authority of the ancient
Church seems to me to rest on a precisely analogous

b 2

c/nM/dvrw H/^VM^U, vC^M^Klv^TK w tU

xx INTRODUCTION.

but still more untenable theory." l If we were faced, as
former generations believed themselves to be, by a clear
and indisputable Divine ordinance, when we consider
the episcopal government, then for devout Christians
there would be nothing more to say. We should have
to reconcile, as best we could, the astounding facts of
contemporary Christendom, and acquiesce, with what
ever violence to our own hearts, in excluding from
Christian fellowship one-third of the Christian family.
But if there be no such clear and indisputable Divine
ordinance, and only a gradual evolution of a system
under the influence of normal forces visibly at work still,
then, indeed, we lie under no such necessity, but may
consider with open minds the eloquent testimonies of
contemporary experience. My contention is nothing
else than this. The evidence of the first ages is incon
clusive : we are left free to learn the lessons of the latest.
The verdict of the history of the past authorises us to
inquire further of the history of the present. The matter
is of such importance that I may be excused a short
discussion of the historical argument. I shall add a few
observations on Dr. Moberly's Ministerial PriestJiood, in
recognition of the fact that many persons have pressed
that book on my notice.

III.

Let me observe, as a preliminary caution, that there
are two ways in which the scanty evidence of the sub-
apostolic age may be interpreted. You may work

1 Life and Letters, vol. ii. p. 435.

EPISCOPAL GOVERNMENT. xxi

forwards from the New Testament, that is, the original
literature of the Christian society, and trace in the
history the working out of the primitive principles and
ideas : or you may adopt an ecclesiastical theory, whether
episcopal or some other, and interpret the history by its
guidance, that is, in accordance with its requirements.
It has been maintained that the latter is a legitimate, if
not a necessary method, that the provisional adoption
of a theory is a serviceable mode, if not even an inevit
able condition, of historic research, and that it is borne
out by the well-known procedure of scientific students.
This might be conceded, perhaps, if the theory were
really treated as provisional, and frankly surrendered
when found to be inadequate : but in actual experience
this is hardly ever the case. I confess, therefore, that I
regard with great suspicion this alleged analogy between
history and natural science. In the case of the student
of physical science, the adoption of a hypothesis may
be a necessary means of marshalling and appreciating
phenomena, and since the affections are not engaged
in the result, no risks to the mental process need be
apprehended ; in the case of the ecclesiastical student,
however, a similar process will probably tend to deflect
the judgment. Principles of interpretation are not
working hypotheses merely : they are also, in the
religious sphere, bound up with convictions : and they,
almost always, draw into the reasoning the subtle and
powerful, but irrelevant and sometimes misleading,
influence of the emotions. I apprehend that the primary
task of the student of history, as well " sacred " as
" profane," is to disentangle and arrange his facts: his

xxii INTRODUCTION.

theory must be inferred from the evidence, thus accumu
lated, marshalled, and appreciated : it must not precede
his knowledge of the facts, or prescribe his interpretation
of them. I cannot withhold the statement of my belief
that the prevailing Anglican doctrine as to the necessity
of the episcopal government is sustained by arguments
which conspicuously illustrate the pseudo-scientific
method I have described and condemned.

There is yet another preliminary caution which seems
requisite. The Christian student must take into con
sideration the whole evidence. The history of the
Christian society must not be arbitrarily broken up
into sections, when the very question to be answered is
the precise testimony yielded by that history. All
Christians believe that within the Christian society
from the first there has been working the Divine energy
of the Holy Ghost. It may serve a legitimate purpose
of political convenience to draw a line between one age
or state of the Church and another, but that line has no
inherent justification, and must not be made the
postulate of reasoning. There is no special sanctity
in one age which should entitle it to give law to any
other. The first four centuries are as little authorita
tive, and as much, as the last four centuries: their
superior importance in some respects is balanced by
their inferior importance in others. One age is as
" catholic " as any other. These are obvious truths
enough, but their bearings are not always remembered.
Thus it docs not often occur to those who urge us to
accept the unanimity of the Church, say, in the fourth
century, on the subject of a Divine-ri-ht episcopate,

THE HISTORICAL ARGUMENT, xxiii

that their argument will apply with equal cogency to
later centuries, which have gone back on that unanimity.
Of course, I am not arguing that whatever is is right.
It is implied in the very notion of an historic revelation,
ministered through a visible society, that there should
be a tradition of Divine truth, which is prior to eccle
siastical history, and independent of it. The Christian
society can never, without stultifying itself, renounce
the ethical ideal of the Gospel, and the didactic norm of
the apostolic writings. The positive institutions of the
Divine Ft under are eternally obligatory, but they are
very few. A ministry of discipline and teaching, the
two sacraments, a Bible, and perhaps the Lord's Day,
seem to exhaust the list. For the rest He left His
Church to the guidance of the Holy Ghost in and by
the manifold discipline of experience, not in one age
only, but in all the ages until the end.

When, with these cautions in mind, we approach the
historical argument on which the necessity of episcopal
ordination is based, we are at once arrested and amazed
at the contrast between the halting and doubtful cha
racter of the premisses, and the momentous nature of the
positive conclusion. It is no doubt the case that the
popular statements of the formal Anglican doctrine give
a very different impression, but no one, who has taken
the trouble to make himself acquainted with the facts,
will dispute my contention. Even those who might
without offence be described as the official apologists of
the Divine-right episcopate, have wonderfully mode
rated their language during recent years. The point is
important as tending to confirm the view, frequently

xxiv INTRODUCTION.

expressed in this volume, that the change which has
passed over educated opinion on the subject of the
origins of the Christian ministry is so considerable as to
require a corresponding modification of ecclesiastical
theory.

I will illustrate my contention by setting side
by side a few statements on the same subject, taken
from the writings of two learned and eminent prelates,
both bearing the same honoured name, who for more
than a generation have enriched the theological thought
of the English Church, and added lustre to the episcopal
bench. I refer to the two Bishops Wordsworth, the late
Bishop of Lincoln, and his son, the present Bishop of
Salisbury. My quotations will be taken, in the one
case, from the twelfth edition of the well-known
theological manual, Theophilus Anglicanus, originally
published in 1843, and constantly republished since, and
to this day included in the list of books recommended in
some dioceses for the study of ordination candidates ;
in the other case, from a learned work, The Ministry
of Grace, Studies in Early Church History with reference
to present problems, which has just issued from the
press : —

BISHOP OF LINCOLN. BISHOP OF SALISBURY.

"That there are these Three "As regards the Ministry, as

Orders in the Church, and that we know it in practice, the

a religious community is not conclusions reached are rather

duly and/«//y a Church without tentative than absolute. They

them is evident ' from Scripture point to a primitive origin for

and ancient authors' . . . and the regular ministry of the Word

from the universal primitive and sacraments, but to an un-

and successive practice of the even rate of development in its

Christian Church " (p. 78). component orders, and to a

CONFLICTING AUTHORITIES. xxv

"The Episcopal government
of the Church was originally
founded in the person and office
of our Blessed Lord Himself"
(p. 86).

" The universal practice of
the Church of Christ, from
its foundation for more than
fifteen hundred years without
interruption, shows Episcopacy
to be of Divine institution, and
to have been regarded by the
Church as of inviolable autho
rity "(p. 87).

longer duration of the charis
matic ministry in some regions
than in others, as well as to the
persistence of the latter as a
' reserve force ' latent in the
Episcopate. As regards the
Episcopate, the facts here stated
indicate a general tendency to a
monarchical regimen, while they
show that it was not everywhere
set up in exactly the same form
or at the same date. The
practical conclusions must surely
be: (i) that while some form
of regular ministry is always
necessary, it need not exclude
a charismatic ministry : and
(2) that while Episcopacy must
be a marked feature of the Church
of the future, it need not every
where have exactly the same
relation to the Presbyterate "
(Preface, p. vii).

. . . During the years A.D.
200-250 we may not only date
the final establishment of the
monarchical episcopate but also
the extension of the minor orders
and of the ministry of women,
and the beginning of the Church
Kalendar" (p. 144).

" It is evidence from these
three centres (i.e., Jerusalem,
Asia Minor, and Antioch), par
ticularly the explicit evidence of
the epistles of S. Ignatius of
Antioch, that enables us to
accept without reserve, the
statement of the preface to our
Ordinal that ' from the Apostles'

xxvi INTRODUCTION.

time there have been these
Orders of Ministers in Christ's
Church : Bishops, Priests and
Deacons.'

" But loyal and thankful ac
ceptance of this statement does
not preclude us from observing
that in two of the greatest Church
centres, closely connected with
one another, namely Rome and
Alexandria, episcopacy did not
grow with the rapidity which
marked its progress in Palestine,
Syria and Asia" (p. 125).

"There is no example of a ... At Rome and Alexandria,
church -without a Bishop for there were at first only two
fifteen centuries after Christ" Orders, the governing order
(p. 88). acting nominally as a corporate

body or college " (p. 142).

Now, it is not merely the contradiction in statements
of fact, which is significant in these extracts : it is far
more the altered tone and method reflected in the
language. Bishop Wordsworth, writing thirty-three
years after the publication of Bishop Lightfoot's famous
Dissertation on the Christian Ministry, and taking account
of such new materials as the industry of scholars, both
at home and abroad, have accumulated in the interval,
deliberately reaffirms his conclusions ; and those con
clusions, the more they are pondered over, are found to
be wholly inadequate to sustain the weight of the
traditional doctrine of a Divine-right episcopate, itself
the necessary channel of sacramental grace. The
Bishop of Salisbury himself finds in his "dispassionate
study of the evidence," a " practical basis for that
reunion between Episcopalians and Presbyterians which

TRADITION AND SCIENCE. xxvii

is one of the most obviously necessary tasks of English-
speaking Christianity " (p. 142).

I have made special reference to the two Bishops
Wordsworth, but the same moral could be pointed by
other scholars. It would be worth the while of any
careful and intelligent reader to be at the pains of
comparing the books written by competent English
Churchmen — for obvious reasons the Germans may be
left out of count, though, in truth, they are our teachers
in historical and critical science — on either side of this
question, say Dr. Moherly and Bishop Gore on the one
side, and Dr. Hort, Dr. Sanday, and Bishop Lightfoot
on the other, and to note the differing handling of the
same facts. He will need no further proof of my con
tention that no positive doctrine, least of all a doctrine
of such a character as that here in question, can reason
ably be based on so disputable and disputed a foundation.

As with Christian history so with the Scriptures. In
the sermon on " Apostolic Succession " I have pointed
out the division of authorities as to the evidence of the
pastoral epistles. I set in contrast Dr. Liddon as the
protagonist of ecclesiastical tradition, and Dr. Hort as
the exponent of critical science, and concluded that
where, on so comparatively simple an issue, such men
differed so widely, it could not be safe, or rational, or
charitable to build a doctrine of such formidable character
that its acceptance involves the "unchurching" of,
perhaps, one-third of the Christians now living on earth.
This becomes the more obvious when we remember that
the facts and texts in question are neither numerous,
nor contested, nor in any extraordinary degree obscure.

xxviii INTRODUCTION.

In thus comparing the distinguished advocates of the
opposed views of the original character of the Christian
Ministry, I must not, of course, be supposed to think
that their respective arguments are equally sound, and
that, in face of their mutual contradiction, a reasonable
assurance of the truth is inaccessible to the modern
inquirer. On the contrary, I hold most strongly, as
indeed is apparent on nearly every page of this book,
that the balance decisively inclines in favour of the
Cambridge scholars and their allies. Their methods are
properly scientific : their reasonings seem to be as free
from irrelevant prejudice as it is possible for human
reasonings, on subjects connected with religion, to be ;
their conclusions are, in my belief, sound and probably
final. The work of Bishop Gore and Dr. Moberly
(to name again the only considerable living English
champions of the traditional school) is marked by
extraordinary subtlety of mind, persuasiveness, learning^
and obvious sincerity, but, to me at least, it is profoundly
unsatisfying.

IV.

It is manifestly impossible, in the narrow compass of
an Introduction, to criticise in detail a book so substantial,
and, in many respects, considerable as Dr. Moberly's
Ministerial Priesthood, nevertheless I conceive myself
called upon to indicate, however briefly, the reasons why
I cannot accept the main contention of that book. In
doing this, I disclaim all purpose of passing judgment
on the Professor's work as philosopher and theologian.
For that task I own myself entirely insufficient. But

"MINISTERIAL PRIESTHOOD." xxix

the essential issue, as Dr. Moberly himself perceives, is
not philosophical, and not theological, but, primarily,
historical ; and, therefore, as a very humble student of
history, I find myself compelled to examine and decisively
reject a treatment of evidence which cannot be reconciled,
in my judgment, with the accepted principles and pro
cedures of historical science. Ministerial Priesthood,
to speik quite candidly, seems to me a notable and
suggestive example of false method, and its criticism of
Bishop Lightfoot's famous Essay, which I reckon a
singularly fine example of right method, impresses me
as quite curiously perverse.

Dr. Moberly defends his method at length in the
prefaces to the first and second editions of his book. I
found those prefaces melancholy reading. They preach
a doctrine of intellectual impotence, and point the moral
of scientific despair. Shrouded in the intricacies of
labyrinthine sentences are the confessions of relentless
and disqualifying prejudice.

The inevitable and unconscious bias incident to the
conditions under which the human mind works is subtly
confused with the superfluous and conscious bias of
mental presuppositions dictated by theories deliberately
adopted. What is true of the first is pleaded in excuse
for the last ; and in the Teutonic obscurity which marks
the author's composition, the unwary reader runs con
siderable risk of being hopelessly confused. Dr. Moberly
is not wholly unconscious of all this, for he repudiates
with some warmth the view apparently taken by some
readers of his first edition, that it constituted nothing
less than "an avowal of incapacity for fair-minded

xxx INTRODUCTION.

appreciation of the evidence," and he assures us that the
last thing for which he would plead is " that theological
preconceptions, as such, should tyrannise over the
interpretation of the text " ; but it is hard to see what
other inference can be drawn from such words as these: —

" The cogency of evidence — nay, its whole value and
even meaning — depends absolutely on the mental con
victions with which we approach it " (p. x).

Or these : —

" I am pleading that the interpretation of the text of
the New Testament should be throughout theological,
as well as exegetical : or rather that theological beliefs
should be recognised as legitimately present in, and for,
the exegetical processes" (p. xiv).

Or these : —

" Nevertheless, I must still plead that the reading of
history in which great vital facts, like the Incarnate Life,
or the nature and meaning of the Church of Christ, are
contained, does and must always so essentially depend
upon the fundamental convictions of the reader, that for
the adequate interpretation of the written history correct
mental presuppositions and principles are as indis
pensable as is a scholarly fidelity to the letter of the
text " (p. xvi).

Or these :—

" When I am perfectly certain of my belief in a
divinely-ordered church, I am right in taking my
certainty with me to the interpretation of passages,

DR. MOBERLY'S ARGUMENT. xxxi

which might otherwise, perhaps, have been explicable
without it. If, indeed, the passages in question were
incompatible with it, I should have to modify my con
ception to suit the passages ; but if they without it are
so far ambiguous, I do certainly right to interpret them
by it " (p. xxvii).

Or these : —

" When we are charged with reading later meanings,
unhistorically, into the earlier language of apostles, I am
not sure that the charge comes really to more than this
— that we are reading the part in the light of the whole,
and using the direct outcome of the guided words and
guided actions of the Apostolic Church, as a whole, to
light up the possible ambiguity of isolated incidents or
texts " (p. xxxi).

The best comment on Dr. Moberly's statements of
theory is his actual practice : and he himself invokes
that test. " I must insist," he says, " that . . . my own
book stands or falls, not according to my success or
failure in this analysis, but according to its own attempt
to give an intelligent, rational, and judicial marshalling
and interpretation of the evidence of the actual historical
facts " (p. xxi).

In the body of the work, after many pages of theo
retical reasoning, we are assured that the vital issue is
"after all mainly a question of history" (p. Hi), and
that "if the theory [i.e., Bishop Lightfoot's] be true
as theory, it is on the field of history that it must estab
lish itself" (p. 112). I may assume, then, that in testing

xxxii INTRODUCTION.

Dr. Moberly's work in the article of his treatment of
the evidence, I shall satisfy his own notion of critical
equity.

At the start, it is to be observed that Dr. Moberly
takes account of very little of the evidence. The
epistles of S. Clement of Rome, of S. Ignatius, and of
S. Polycarp, and, in a minor degree, the Didache, the
Shepherd of Hermas, and the epistle of Barnabas, form
the entire basis of his discussion. He makes no reference
to the famous passage in S. Jerome, or the well-known
case of Alexandria, or the equally well-known statement
of Eutychius. Of course, he could not take notice of
evidence which has been brought to light quite recently,
e.g., the worthlessness of the early episcopal list of
Jerusalem,1 the remarkable letter of Severus of Antioch,
recently translated from the Syriac, and the more
doubtful, though not unimportant, apophthegm of the
Egyptian monk Poemen.2 I do not wish to labour the
matter, but I will, shortly, advise any one who really
cares to form a just estimate of Dr. Moberly's work to
contrast the evidence of which he takes account with
that examined by Bishops Lightfoot and Wordsworth in

1 Viiie article by C. H. Turner in the Journal of Theological
Studies, July, 1900. "We cannot adduce the succession of
Jerusalem as a continuous witness to primitive episcopacy."

1 These are printed in the Journal of Theological btudits, July,
1901, in a note by G. W. Brooks on " The Ordination of the early
Bishops of Alexandria." Mr. Brooks remarks with reference to the
Letter of Severus : " Here we have a distinct statement, four
hundred years before Eutychius, that it was at one time the custom
for the Alexandrine presbyters to ordain their Bishops ; and as
Severus wrote in Egypt, he may be assumed to give the tradition
current in the Church of Alexandria in his time."

ST. CLEMENT'S EVIDENCE. xxxiii

their respective discussions of the same subject. He
will certainly feel that, whatever the value of the
Professor's conclusions, they are drawn from a curiously
insufficient examination of the facts.

More serious, however, is the treatment of such
evidence as he includes in his argument. I will state
bluntly that in my judgment Dr. Moberly's use of
S. Clement of Rome puts him out of court as a serious
historian. So severe an estimate will excuse a careful
examination of the point in question.

S. Clement's epistle is, perhaps, the best known, as
it certainly is the earliest, of the sub-apostolic writings
which have come down to us. It is easily accessible,
both in Greek and English, and I would urge every
student of " Ministerial Priesthood " to take the trouble
of reading it through. He will hardly be prepared for
Dr. Moberly's view of the character of that rather
commonplace document. He will find that it " is
framed on the model of the apostolic epistles, and is
mainly taken up with enforcing the duties of meekness,
humility, and submission to lawful authority." l The
object of the letter was to allay certain dissensions in
the church at Corinth, and accordingly the writer is led
to insist on the necessity of order in every sphere of
existence. Dr. Moberly's description creates an uncom
fortable suspicion of anachronism, although the actual
statements can be, more or less, justified.

" The letter of St. Clement, itself within the first
century of our era, is the formal remonstrance of the
Church of imperial Rome, addressed under the highest
1 Salmon : Introduction to the Ne^> Testament, p. 573.

G.U,

xxxiv INTRODUCTION.

sense of responsibility in a grave ecclesiastical emer
gency, to the Church of the provincial capital of Achaia.
It is difficult to imagine a document, not actually
apostolic or inspired, which could take higher rank in
respect of authority. Moreover, this solemn remon
strance of the Church of Rome is entirely concerned,
from the first page to the last, with a question of
ecclesiastical order" (p. 179).

The Greek text, without notes, fills thirty-six pages
of Bishop Lightfoot's edition ; Dr. Moberly is actually
concerned with twelve lines, and even they do not justify
his inferences. Dr. Sanday has conveniently printed, as
a note to his remarkable sermon on " The Origin of the
Ministry," the original passage, together with the ancient
Latin version recently discovered by Dom. G. Morin,
and an English translation. I reproduce his note as a
whole, not merely because of its value for my present
purpose, but also because by doing so I direct attention
to a small book which has an importance out of all
proportion to its size, and which illustrates those prin
ciples of historical science which Dr. Moberly ignores
or violates on nearly every page of his substantial work.

Note on Clem. Rom. ad Cor. xliv. 1-3.

" It is contended that although the doctrine of
apostolic succession is not found in the New Testa
ment, it is laid down so explicitly by S. Clement of
Rome as to show that the principle must really date from
the time of the apostles. The passage in question is as
follows. I give the Greek text with the ancient Latin
version recently discovered by Dom. G. Morin : —

CLEMENT ON APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION, xxxv

Kat ot ciTTOoroAot fjffMV tyvaxrav 8ia TOV vpwv yaw
Xpurrov on fyts torcu cVi TOU ovcl/xaro? T^S €7r«rKO7r»;s. Atu
TUITT/V o?r TT)V airtup rrpoyvawrti' ciAv/<£oTC5 TtAcuxv Ka.Ti<rrrj<rav TOVS
7rpoctpr;/A«'ov?, Kat /lera^u C7rtj'o/i7/v tScuxav [or ScScoKcurti'] OTTWS,
cav KOip.tj$Cj<nr, SiaSt^wiTai «T«poi ScSoKi/xacr/xtvoi uv8/)<s TT)V
AeiTOi'/jyiav aurwr. Tov? ovi' *caTa(TTa6oTas VTT' e/cet'vojv T) /zcra^u

TOU

of Sticaaos VOfU^OfJM> d.rroj3d\.\tcr()a.i T^s A
tVivo/xjyi' A Lat. CTTiSo/xiyj/ C (f/". Syr.) :

adopted by Lightfoot, is a conjecture. The accession
of Lat. to the best MS. seems to establish

'* Et apostoli nostri scierunt per Dominum nostrum
Ihesum Christum, quia contentio erit pro nomine aut
episcopatu. Propter hanc causam prudentiam accipi-
entes pcrpetuam pntposucrunt illos supradictos, et
postmodum legem dederunt, ut si dormierint, suscipiunt
viri alii probati ministerium eorum. Igitur illos consti
tutes ab illis vcl postmodum a quibusdam viris ornatis
consentiente aecclesia omne (sic), et ministrantes sine
querela gregi Christi . . . hos aestimamus non debere
eici ab administratione."

" And our Apostles knew through our Lord Jesus
Christ that there would be strife over the name of the
bishop's office. For this cause therefore, having received
complete foreknowledge, they appointed the aforesaid
persons, and afterwards gave a further injunction that if
they should fall asleep, other approved men should suc
ceed to their ministrations. Those therefore who were
appointed by them, or afterwards by other men of repute,

C 2

xxxvi INTRODUCTION.

with the consent of the whole Church, and have minis
tered unblamably to the flock of Christ . . . these men
we consider to be unjustly deposed from their
ministration."

" St. Clement is insisting here on the regular and
responsible appointment of the Corinthian presbyters.
He does not hint in any way at a transmission of powers.
The crepoi eXXoyt/xoi urS/jes are not, as some translations of
St. Clement's language might lead us to suppose, placed
on the direct line of descent from the Apostles. When
we think of the importance of prophecy and the activity
of prophets in the Apostolic age, it is very improbable
that all who held office or dignity in the Church were
appointed to it directly by Apostles in either the wider
or the narrower sense. The state of things described by
St. Clement is just what would be natural. Nominations
to office would be made by an Apostle, if one was avail
able ; if not, by those whom the Church most trusted.
But in all cases the assent of the Church was required." l

Dr. Sanday undoubted!}' expresses the opinion of
every trained historian, and, indeed, of every intelligent
reader of S. Clement's words who has no ecclesiastical
theory to confuse his judgment. Dr. Moberly himself
reminds us that he is not a trained historian ; how far
his intense conviction of the truth of the traditional
episcopal theory has affected his view of the passage
before us will be best shown by a few quotations. He
tells us that S. Clement maintains " as strongly as it is
possible for man to maintain it" the doctrine "that
ministerial office depends upon orderly transmission from
1 Vide The Conception of Priesthood, pp. 70-72. Longmans.

DR. MOBERLY ON S. CLEMENT, xxxvii

those empowered to transmit the authority to ordain-
that is, upon a real apostolic succession " (p. 114).

He paraphrases the argument of the epistle, and on
the basis of his summary submits " that it would be
difficult to find a stronger assertion than this of the
principle that ministerial office is an outward and orderly
institution, dependent for its validity upon transmission,
continuous and authorized, from the apostles, whose
own commission was direct from Jesus Christ" (p. 115).

It is, of course, universally known that S. Clement's
epistle is anonymous, and that his authorship, though
sufficiently authenticated by the unanimous tradition of
the next age, is not anywhere suggested in the document
itself. It is characteristic of Dr. Moberly's method that
he absolutely ignores these circumstances, and every
where refers to the epistle in language which would
hardly be inadequate if it were an official papal bull.
Thus we read on p. 116: "When it is remembered in
what position St. Clement stood, and with what tone
and claim of authoritative remonstrance he wrote, as
the persona of the Church of Rome to the Church of
Corinth, and again, to what date he and his writing
belong, he himself in greater or less degree a companion
of apostles, and his letter written as early as the dying
years of the first century, very little after — if after — the
close of the life of St. John, the significance of this exceed
ingly strong assertion of the principle of apostolic suc
cession in this earliest of authoritative post-apostolic
writings becomes overwhelming indeed. Not Ignatius
himself is a stronger witness to ' apostolic succession '
than is the Church of Rome in the person of St. Clement."

xxxviii INTRODUCTION.

I may observe in passing that the reference to Ignatius
is singularly unfortunate, since that Father, although " his
name is inseparably connected with the championship of
episcopacy," yet is quite innocent of the later theory
" as to the principle on which the episcopate claims
allegiance " ; " nor is there any approach " in his writings,
" even to the language of Irenaeus, who, 'regarding the
episcopate as the depositary of the doctrinal tradition of
the apostles, lays stress on the apostolic succession as a
security for its faithful transmission."1 Indeed, Dr.
Moberly himself, when, at a later stage, he treats directly
the Ignatian letters, and labours to prove their essential
agreement with S. Clement's epistle even in the ecclesi
astical system they disclose, comes near to admitting
this. " It is only," he says with justice, " as the symbol
of unity that the bishop is magnified. If S. Ignatius'
expressions are compatible with an episcopally autocratic
jurisdiction, they are no less compatible with an epis
copacy which wields no jurisdiction save as chairman
and symbol of the presbyteral body. Whatever more
there was, or was to become, must be looked for else
where than in these letters" (p. 200).

But to return to S. Clement. Possessed with the
notion that he has found all he wants in the first and
best of the apostolic Fathers, Dr. Moberly sets no
restraints on his language. The statements steadily
grow in definiteness and amplitude until at last the
slender basis in the patristic text wholly falls from mind
and S. Clement seems to be credited with the matured
and rigorous ecclesiastical theory which Dr. Moberly

1 Vide Bishop Lightfoot : Apostolic Fathers, Part II., vol. i., p. 396.

APOSTOLIC DEVOLUTION. xxxix

evidently believes to bean essential part of the Christian
creed. At the risk of being tiresome I must multiply
quotations. If I weary my readers, I shall at least
secure their confidence. We learn that " the solemn
remonstrance of the Roman with the Corinthian
Christians turned upon the question of apostolic and
continuous transmission of ministry" (p. 124); that
"the massive authority of the Church of Rome, speaking
within the first century in the person of S. Clement,
makes sufficiently clear to us the meaning of the
principle, which since the days of S. Clement has never
been successful-challenged in the Church — the principle,
namely, that ministerial validity is provided for, on the
human and material side, and in that sense is dependent
upon, a continuity of orderly appointment and institu
tion, received in each generation from those who
themselves had been authorized to institute by the
institution of those before them ; that is, on analysis,
by uninterrupted transmission of authority from the
men whose own title to authority was that they too were
'Apostles' 'sent' by Him Who, even Himself, was
'sent 'to be the Christ" (p. 125). I have transcribed
the whole passage as an excellent example of Dr.
Moberly's style, and what I can only call the inveterate
anachronistic habit of his thought. In a subsequent
chapter we are reminded again of " St. Clement's extreme
insistence upon the principle of subordination to minis
terial authority, or upon the principle of orderly
succession of appointment from the apostles as consti
tutive of ministry" (p. 182); that "there is nothing
which St. Clement emphasises more than the appeal to

xl INTRODUCTION.

apostolic order, based upon apostolical succession;" that
"his theory of apostolic devolution, as the essential
condition of any authorised ministry, is too definite and
too peremptory to admit of" Bishop Lightfoot's theory
as to the origin of the episcopate (p. 185); that "the first
principle of the Church in St. Clement's day was that
the one essential condition of any lawful ministry was
delegation, by orderly succession, from the apostles"
(p. 189); that "in the Roman letter of S. Clement" is
set forth " a stringent theory of apostolic devolution and
succession " (p. 197). Now let any impartial man turn
back to Dr. Sanday's note quoted above, and read again
the actual words of S. Clement and the professor's
comments on them, and then contrast the extravagant
language of Dr. Moberly. He cannot escape the con
clusion that, however eminent in other spheres, Dr.
Moberly is constitutionally unable to appreciate historic
evidence. I will not examime the remarkable argument,
which is evidently advanced in good faith, that since
Ignatius wrote in courteous and even flattering terms to
the Roman Church, therefore that Church must have
satisfied his conception of ecclesiastical order, i.e., been
episcopally governed. The inference would be sound
enough in the case of a rigid Anglican of the twentieth
century, therefore it may be assumed to be equally
sound in the case of a bishop of the second ! So
satisfied is Dr. Moberly with " the uncompromising
theory of episcopal succession in the letter of Clement "
(p. 218), that he effects a complete reversal of the
generally accepted standpoint from which the evidence
of the apostolic age is judged. He explains away the

DR. MOBERLY'S SUMMARY. xli

episcopal position of S. James in Jerusalem, because to
admit it might seem to concede the principle of evolution
from the presbyterate (vide pp. 149, 150). The more
doubtful cases of Timothy and Titus are magnified far
beyond the evidence, because these " apostolic dele
gates " seem to embody the cardinal principle of
devolution (ride pp. 151 f.). The importance of the
Didachc is belittled beyond all reason, because it
presents a view of the Church which is not easily
reconcilable with the clear-cut theory which is rooted
in the Professor's conviction, The really vital question
of the character and range of the apostolate in the
apostolic Church is totally ignored in the argument, and
dismissed contemptuously in a note (p. 136), because
Dr. Moberly's central thesis depends on an arbitrary
and rigid view of the apostolic office, which that question
tends to traverse. Everywhere the New Testament is
used in a thoroughly obsolete fashion, and although on
a trivial point Dr. Hort's Christian Ecclesia is referred
to (p. 156), yet his whole treatment of the Pastoral
Epistles in that book is left out of count altogether, in
spite of the fact that it disallows the whole position
dogmatically propounded in the text. The explanation
of Dr. Moberly's procedure is revealed in the curious
summary of his argument, which forms the conclusion
of chapter vi. He confesses himself to be a student in
bonds, to go to his examination of the evidence with
the conviction paramount in his mind that to accept
any other conclusion than that already established in
the traditional beliefs of the Church will involve ecclesi
astical perdition. If the historic episcopate be not the

xlii INTRODUCTION.

continuation of the apostolic " background," then the
vital principle of any valid ministry has been lost.

" The question is then whether, between the close of
the New Testament and the middle of the second century,
there was an interval in which presbyterate had no back
ground at all ; and whether, by consequence, the back
ground of episcopacy which we may certainly assume as
universal and unquestioned before I5OA.D., was really,
with continuous apostolic devolution of authority, invented
and evolved from below. Was one background abolished ?
and when there was none, was another devised in its
stead ? Or was the later background, with whatever
modifications of conditions or title, itself the direct out
come, by lineal descent, from the earlier ? This question,
and the answer to it, are cardinal. Upon the answer
that is given it is not too much to say that absolutely
everything, in the rationale of church ministry, depends.
If episcopacy is really in its origin evolved, not trans
mitted, then the orders which it confers, and which depend
upon it, are ultimately also not transmitted, but humanly
devised. Then the entire belief of Christendom upon the
essential character of Church ministry — which was true,
in fact, in the New Testament, and during the lifetime of
apostles — died to truth when they died, and has been
a fundamental falsehood ever since. Then the saintliest
bishops and priests in Christian history, whatever they
might be in personal endowment, differed not one jot — if
we need not quite say, in respect of ministerial character or
authority, yet at least in respect of the ultimate rationale
of principle which constitutes the divine foundation and
security of ministry — from the good men whom the last

HOME REUNION. xliii

new sect has chosen to appoint to be its ministers"
(p. 216,217).

The contemptuous allusion in the concluding sentence
is all the notice Dr. Moberly deigns to take of non-
episcopal Christianity. His "Christendom" does not
include the Churches of the Reformation, nor does his
"Christian History" continue beyond the sixteenth
century. Having triumphed by main force of religious
certitude over the evidence of the earliest ages, he feels
no need to face the facts of the latest.

V.

Finally, if I am asked to point out what practical steps
at this present time I would advocate, I would answer
that for some while to come there will be need of a
constant and concentrated effort to create within the
Anglican communion a public opinion favourable to the
recognition of the non-episcopal churches. But I would
dare to hope that in 1902, the attitude which commended
itself to the strong committee of Bishops appointed at
the Lambeth Conference of 1888 to consider the question
of "home reunion" will seem more tolerable than it
did to the Conference itself. That committee agreed
upon a statement and a resolution, which do not indeed
appear in the official report of the Conference, but, by
a happy accident, were made public in the course of the
proceedings. After laying down the "quadrilateral " basis
for reunion, viz., Holy Scripture, the Apostles' and Xicene
Creeds, the two great sacraments, and "the Historic
Episcopate," the committee went on to speak of the duty

xliv INTRODUCTION.

of holding brotherly conferences with the representatives
of other chief Christian communions in the English-
speaking races. Then followed this important statement
and resolution : —

"But they [i.e., the bishops of the committee] observe
that while the Church in her 2$rd Article lays down the
necessity of the ministry as a sacred order, commissioned
by those ' who have public authority given unto them in
the congregation,' and while for herself she has defined
the latter term by insisting in her own communion on
Episcopal ordination, she has nowhere declared that all
other constituted ministry is null and void. They also
note that in the troubled period following the Refor
mation (up to the year 1662) ministers not episcopally
ordained were in certain cases recognised as fit to hold
office in the Church of England, and that some chief
authorities, even in the High Church School, defended
and acted upon this recognition in England, Scotland
and Ireland. The question, therefore, which presents
itself to them is this, whether the present circumstances of
Christianity among us are such as to constitute a sufficient
reason for such exceptional action now ? To this question
— looking to the infinite blessings which must result from
any right approach towards reunion, not only in Great
Britain and Ireland, but in the American and Colonial
communities — looking also to the unquestioned fact that
upon some concession upon this matter depends, humanly
speaking, the only hope of such an approach — they can
not but conceive that our present condition, perhaps in
a higher degree than at any former time, justifies an
affirmative answer. They therefore humbly submit the

BISHOP BARRY. xlv

following resolution to the wisdom of the Conference :
' That in the opinion of this Committee, conferences
such as we have recommended are likely to be fruitful
under God's blessing of practical result only if under
taken with willingness on behalf of the Anglican
Communion, while holding firmly the threefold order of
the ministry as the normal rule of the Church to be
observed in the future — to recognize, in spite of what
we must conceive as irregularity, the ministerial character
of those ordained in non-Episcopal Communions, through
whom, as ministers, it has pleased God visibly to work
for the salvation of souls, and the advancement of His
kingdom ; and to provide, in such way as may be agreed
upon, for the acceptance of such ministers as fellow-
workers with us in the service of the Lord Jesus Christ.'"1
In a most interesting letter, printed as an appendix to
the Bishop of Salisbury's biography of his uncle, Bishop
Charles Wordsworth, Bishop Barry, who was chairman
of the Lambeth Conference Committee from which the
just-quoted statement and resolution proceeded, has
explained the intentions of himself and his colleagues : —
" It must be remembered," he says, " that they desired to
see steps taken either towards corporate reunion or
towards such relation as may prepare for fuller organic
unity hereafter." I imagine that the latter of these
alternatives was chiefly before their minds as more
likely to be practicable, and that they had the idea of a
kind of federation of congregations of the non-
episcopal bodies — if any proposal for reunion were

1 This passage is printed on p. 258 of The Episcopate of Charles
by the present Bishop of Salisbury.

xlvi INTRODUCTION.

accepted — retaining their own present ministers under
episcopal recognition, with the understanding that in
the hereafter there should be episcopal ordination for
their successors. Probably also some consecration to
the episcopate/^- saltnm was contemplated in the case
of leading ministers of any of these communions."

Is it extravagant to hope that the next Lambeth
Conference will be better disposed towards such sane
and charitable proposals than the Conference to which
they were vainly addressed ?

One very practical and useful step in the direction of
unity could be taken at once. Why should not the
Presbyterian clergy be requested to commend their
communicant parishioners who come to sojourn or
reside in England to the English clergy ? and why
should not the bishops, or any bishop in his own diocese,
formally require that such letters of commendation be
accepted as sufficient evidence of fitness to receive the
Holy Communion ? In this way not only would a
practical hardship be removed, but a principle would be
affirmed capable of wide application.

Two classes of possible readers will find in these
sermons nothing to approve, nothing to consider. Those
(as I trust and hope a diminishing number) who are well
pleased with the present state of unrestricted denomina
tional competition, who argue frankly and boldly from
commerce to religion, and advocate free trade in both,
who see nothing incongruous in religious advertisement
and nothing humiliating in religious conflict, will read
my words (if they condescend to read them at all)
with impatience and disgust. I protest in advance that

CONCLUSION. xlvii

to them I have no message. Those again (as I suppose
a large, possibly the largest, section of the religious
public) who do not perceive any reason why the tradi
tional attitude of the churches should be modified, or
even abandoned, in deference to the intellectual move
ment of the modern age, who are content to go on
repeating authoritative formulas without regard to their
adequacy as expressions of actual belief, and think it
sufficient to meet the " obstinate questionings " of the
historian, the critic, and the man of science, with the
chose jugt'e of ecclesiastical decisions, will regard my
labours as worse than futile. With respect to them
also I protest in advance that I have no message.

But if there be, as I believe, a large and increasing
number of thoughtful men, both within and without the
formal membership of the churches, who, as they look
round on the fierce conflicts of Christian men, arc
stricken with an immense anguish ; who, as they take
account of the prevailing forces in society, are filled
with a profound anxiety ; who, as they falteringly repeat
the accustomed formuke of faith, and draw sword
reluctantly for the accredited shibboleths, are deeply
and painfully conscious that they arc doing violence to
their own clearest perceptions of truth and right ; if
there be any Christians anywhere who feel as an
intolerable oppression the strange and pervading contra
diction between the spirit of the Gospel and that which
is paramount in the churches — then I know in advance
that, however grave may be the faults of my work, yet
its design and motive will command acceptance. It is
to such men, and to such only, that I address myself.

GODLY UNION AND CONCORD.

THE UNCHANGING FAITH

Preached in Westminster Abbey, 'j'anuitfy G//I 1901

JESUS CHRIST IS THE SAME YESTERDAY, AND TO-DAY, YEA, AND

FOR EVER. — Hebrews xiii. 8.

Till-: Festival of the Epiphany is the necessary
complement of the Festival of Christmas : for the
Incarnation of God, which the Church proclaims on
Christmas Day, involves the principle of catholic
redemption. Particularism is irrational and intolerable
as the consequence of Divine action : if in the Son
of Mary the Christian world has rightly revered the
Incarnate Creator, then no less a sphere than creation
itself must be the scene of the salvation which He effects.
Thus our minds pass in strict logical order from affirming
the Incarnation on the one festival to affirming, as the
true and necessary consequence of the Incarnation, a
catholic Christianity on the other. Somehow all the
whole universe of created being must be vitally interested
in the redemptive action of its Creator : no part of that

G.U. B

2 THE UNCHANGING FAITH.

life which draws its ultimate origin from Him can lie
outside the influence of His Incarnation ; the "comfort
able word " of the Evangelist enshrines the obvious
conclusion of reason when it connects the mission of the
Redeemer with the salvation of the entire kosmos of
creation. " God so loved the world that He gave His
only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him
should not perish, but have eternal life."

Obvious as the universality of the Gospel seems to us
now, it did not seem obvious to those first believers, who
came to discipleship by the way of the Jewish law. Bred
from their infancy in the atmosphere of religious particu
larism, accustomed to regard themselves as the chosen
monopolists of Divine favour, these first Christians
found the notion of a catholic salvation unwelcome and
even repulsive. S. Paul speaks in language, which it is
difficult for the modern believer to appreciate, of the
grand secret of universalism, which had been revealed
to him by the Holy Spirit. That was the " mystery of
Christ, which in other generations was not made known
unto the sons of men, as it hath [he said] now been
revealed unto His holy apostles and prophets in the
Spirit ; to wit, that the Gentiles are fellow-heirs, and
fellow-members of the body, and fellow-partakers of the
promise in Christ Jesus through the Gospel."

I think it a happy coincidence that the first Sunday
of the new year, and, as we have agreed to think, of a
new century, has synchronized with the festival of the
Epiphany, that an occasion on which it is manifestly
inevitable that we should examine the assumptions on
which we are governing our lives, and scrutinise closely

CHRISTIAN MISGIVINGS. 3

the beliefs on which we build the fabric of our civiliza
tion, should be met by that frank assertion of the catholic
claim of Jesus Christ which is the characteristic witness
of this day. The question which rises in all thoughtful
minds to-day is shortly this : Can that claim any longer
justify itself to the intelligence of the civilized world ?
or, to phrase it in the vivid language of common life, Is
Christianity played out ? We must admit — we who
stand before our fellow-men as the accredited advocates
and exponents of Christianity, who wear the livery of
the Christian ministry, and whose lives are given as
pledges that Christianity is the living truth of God—
I say, we must admit that there is much, very much, in
the existing situation to excuse, nay, to compel, the
misgivings which inspire such questions. We look back
on a century of change. You have heard from this
pulpit within the last few days eloquent and impressive
descriptions of the amazing contrasts which leap to the
eyes when we compare the state of England, as we know
it now, with the state of England when, amid the storm
and fear of the French War, the nineteenth century
began. I do not think I do those distinguished preachers
any wrong — at least, I am speaking under the correc
tion of your memories — if I say that, in the main,
they left on us a sense of depression and anxiety.
Their sermons were a public confession of Christian
misgiving. And now, to-day, as I, in my turn, am
called to handle the same inevitable theme, I find
myself compelled to adopt the same modest and
sorrowful tone.

We can no longer use the language of confident

B 2

4 THE UNCHANGING FAITH.

optimism ; we can no more speak with the old assured
conviction ; we turn away with disgust and contempt
from the popular missionary maps, with their bold
colourings of a world in Christian white and pagan
black, and sinister-coloured heathen and other mis
believers. For we are faced by these two formidable
facts. On the one hand, the moral state of Christendom
is strangely, amazingly inadequate to what the Christian
theory seems to require. On the other hand, the intellect
of civilized mankind seems to find the established creed
of Christendom less and less acceptable. In fact, it is
hard to resist the impression that the Christian churches
are no longer in the van of the moral and intellectual
progress of the human race. There was a time, not long
distant, when the staple of Christian apologetics was the
moral superiority of Christian civilization. Can it be
honestly denied that it is increasingly difficult to take
that ground ? The lurid pictures of classical depravity,
in which the colours are provided by the gibes of a
Juvenal or a Martial, are felt to be no fair representations
of that " hard pagan world," which, in spite of all its
faults, has laid its spell on all succeeding ages. And
the serene confidence which inspired the eulogies of
Christian society, in which a past generation indulged,
cannot survive the shocks to which the exact social
statistics and the relentless publicity of our time are
continually exposing it. Is there one trait of flagitious
wickedness in the society, which Juvenal satirised with
the robust scorn of a Hebrew prophet, which we do not
well know to be present in the society of this great city ?
Or the contemporary non- Christian world — is it so

CHRISTIAN MISGIVINGS. 5

conspicuously and grossly inferior to that Christendom
which aspires to pillage, conquer, and — convert it ?
These questions, and questions like these, are openly
asked by the opponents of Christianity, and we, its
advocates, cannot ignore them.

When we turn from the moral to the intellectual life
of our time, is it not the case that we have scarcely less
cause for misgiving ? It is, indeed, true that the imposing
mass of Christian dogma remains the official statement
of the faith of believers ; nay, this last century witnessed,
in the most numerous and powerful section of the Christian
Church, extensive additions to its already exaggerated
bulk. But is it the case now that living convictions
inhabit these lengthy formulae? Does the reason of an
intelligent discipleship accept those lists of credenda ?
Does the conscience of the worshippers in the churches
sanction the liturgies and endorse the creeds ? We have
but to glance at current theological literature to see that
the mind and conscience of Christendom are afflicted
by cruel anxieties : among the educated few a vague
eclecticism, which tolerates all formuh-c by an ex animo
acceptance of none, retains the language, and forfeits
the vigour, of the old orthodoxy ; among the untaught
and half-educated multitude a sentimental Christianity,
which gives free play to the emotions and makes no
appeal to the intelligence, which is too incoherent to
be dogmatic, and therefore finds no difficulty in being
undogmatic, which is too recent to be historic, and
therefore feels no shame in being what the barbarous
cant of the hour calls " undenominational." Both the
cultivated eclecticism and the popular unsectarianism of

6 THE UNCHANGING FAITH.

our time reveal and express a deep repugnance to
traditional Christianity.

I have frankly acknowledged — as I was honestly
bound to acknowledge — the strength of the case which
I have to meet when I venture to maintain the bold,
the almost paradoxical, thesis that the Faith in Jesus
Christ is still the one power which can regenerate men
and, through the agency of regenerated men, save
human society from perdition. I have adopted, as the
best statement of my thesis, a striking sentence from the
Epistle to the Hebrews. "Jesus Christ is the same
yesterday, and to-day, yea, and for ever." The cir
cumstances, which moved the sacred writer to address
this declaration to his brethren, were in some important
particulars not dissimilar to those in which we now
stand. The epistle was written at the commencement
of the Jewish war, which ended in the taking of
Jerusalem by Titus, and the final destruction of the
Jewish polity. We can hardly, at this distance of time,
enter into those feelings of horror, astonishment, and
regret which that great catastrophe moved in the minds
of all Jews. It meant much more to them than the
shipwreck of their patriotic hopes ; it came near to
involving the bankruptcy of the national faith, for it
seemed to disallow all those expectations which the
religion of Israel had created and nourished ; it seemed
to convict the prophets of imposture, and to invalidate
even the venerated scriptures.

No doubt the Christian Jews had in their belief a
remedy against the desperate distress which threatened
the religious conviction of their compatriots, but they

A HISTORIC PARALLEL. 7

were slow to grasp the bearings of their creed. " The
close connexion of the early Church with the Temple,
the splendour and venerable majesty of the ritual, could
not fail to make the thought of severance from Judaism
most grievous to those who had hitherto been able to
share in its noblest services according to the custom of
their youth."1

It is only by very slow stages that men realize the
consequences of their own convictions ; long after we
have surrendered all deliberate belief in the conventions
of an ancient system, those conventions colour our
thoughts and control our lives. So with these Christian
Jews. They had deliberately professed themselves
disciples of Christ, but they still thought as Jews, and,
in large measure, lived as Jews. The destruction of the
Temple would be scarcely less dismaying to them than
to the rest of their countrymen. It would violently
divorce their Christianity from its accustomed Jewish
connections, and force it to stand independently of
external support, on its own basis. I say that these
believing Jews, face to face with a crisis which threatened
their faith, and afflicted them with deep religious per
plexity, may be said to bear a certain similarity to us,
who now at the end of a century of theological revolution,
confronted by a thousand circumstances of religious peril,
are anxiously seeking the true bases of our faith.

The closing years of the Jewish polity were years of
persecution ; for, at a time when patriotic passion was
at fever heat, it was but natural that the Christian Jews
should become acutely unpopular. Thus these Hebrews,

Westcott. Heb., p. xl.

8 THE UNCHANGING FAITH.

to whom the epistle was addressed, had to endure the
double strain of external trouble and inward perplexity.
The sacred writer fixes their attention on the person of
the Redeemer. Systems of theology, of worship, of
discipline (he says) are provisional and therefore tem
porary ; they are merciful adaptations to human need,
but they partake of human instability. They become
obsolete, grow old, and pass away ; this fate is now
overtaking the greatest and most venerated of all
systems, that which had been their spiritual home, to
which they were bound by a thousand tender and holy
links. Judaism was, in its turn, destined to pass away.
Was there, then, nothing which would endure ? Had
the soul no lasting support ? Were the love, and
enthusiasm, and bright hopes of discipleship doomed to
share the common fate ? He answers their cry of
anguish by pointing them to no system, creed, church,
Bible — no provisional and therefore transitory organisa
tion for human help, but to the living person of the
Redeemer. "Jesus Christ [he says] is the same yesterday,
and to-day, yea, and for ever." What He was in the past,
when you came to Him as penitents and received from
Him pardon and peace, that He is now, as you know
well, when you whisper the secrets of your own soul,
and that He will always be — the Source of moral strength,
the Lord of Life — " Christ in you the hope of glory.'

The witness of history, and the testimony of present
experience, and the venture of the faith which (S. John
said) " ovcrcometh the world," these are summed up in
the stately, simple creed, "Jesus Christ is the same
yesterday, and to-day, yea, and for ever." 1 ask my

THE WITNESS OF HISTORY. 9

brethren, I ask myself, Is that creed valid still ? Can we,
without violence to conscience, and without loss of our
own intellectual self-respect, accept that creed ? Can
we, standing on the threshold of a new century — a
century which seems destined to be not less revolutionary
than its predecessor — deliberately and with complete
sincerity take on to our lips this great affirmation, and
rest on it our hopes for the future ? To these questions
I, at least, must confess my conviction that an affirmative
answer must be returned.

For, when in our turn we make appeal to history,
one fact stands out " luminously clear " in the record of
the Christian past. The one unchanging factor of
ecclesiastical life is the personal influence of the Founder
of Christianity. Those elements of original Christianity
which have held their ground through all the changes
and chances of nineteen centuries are directly connected
with the person of Christ. " The Lord," as from the first
He has been styled by believers, in a distinctive and
pre-eminent sense, " the one Lord " of S. Paul and the
Nicene Creed, has imparted something of His own
immortality to the institutions which He ordained.
Amid the infinite and bewildering mutations of historic
Christianity, these primitive elements maintain them
selves and unify the various whole. The Lord's Day,
the Lord's Supper, the (jospel of the Lord's life, the
Baptism which the Lord commanded, with the formula
which He Himself ordained, the Lord's Prayer, earliest
and noblest of all the historic liturgies — these things have
lasted when the institutions of the apostles and the canons
of the undivided Church have, in spite of immense

io THE UNCHANGING FAITH.

efforts to avert their fate, silently fallen into desuetude.
Go deeper, and you will find that this unique persistence
of the strictly original elements of Christianity is sym
bolical of the astonishing and unique fact that Christ's
Personal Influence has always continued, and always dis
covered itself by the same tokens. That influence is the
source of the Christian character, and the inexhaustible
storehouse of recuperative power within the Church.

Consider these two facts. All men are agreed that
there is such a thing as the Christian character, common
to all the saints who have commanded the homage of
mankind, and yet compatible with an endless variety of
natural disposition, a plainly distinctive thing, not to be
found outside the Christian sphere, a subtle blending
of the austere and the sympathetic, the lofty and the
amiable, the heroic and the tender, which in pre-
Christian and non- Christian societies was unknown.
This unique and gracious moral type is plainly the
creation of Christ. In its perfection we find it in the
sacred narratives, which record His life. It is matter
of unquestionable fact that the sainthoods of history are
faint copies of the supreme sainthood of Jesus. Hence
the curious family likeness of the saints. They are so
different, and yet they are so strangely similar. The
distinguishing traits of their several age, race, tempera
ment, degree of culture, manner of life, are not lost or
even weakened in them, but they are all touched and
transfigured by a common glory, all subtly and won-
drously conformed to one likeness. It is the glory
which glows on Calvary, and the likeness which faces us
on every page of the Gospel.

THE WITNESS OF EXPERIENCE, n

Sainthoods of history— ah, yes, you say they are the
treasures of the world's past, but they are with us no
longer : through the haze of ever lengthening time they
loom on our hungry eyes with a strangely winning
beauty : but the great succession ended when faith died
before the desecrating presence of modern doubt.

" Ay, ages long endured His span

Of life — 'tis true received —
That gracious Child, that thorn-crown'd Man !
He lived while we believed.

" While we believed, on earth He went,

And open stood His grave.
Men call'd from chamber, church, and tent ;
And Christ was by to save.

" Now He is dead ! Far hence He lies

In the lorn Syrian town ;
And on His grave with shining eyes
The Syrian stars look down.''

Is that the fear that arrests you, as you listen to the
accordant testimony of the centuries, and dread to build
on it a present confidence ?

I turn to a nearer and more authoritative witness, and
address my appeal to the actual experience of men. Is
the personal influence of Jesus Christ a perished thing
of the past, as that sad poet sung ? Look around
you; look within you: the answer cannot be doubtful.
The personal influence of the living Master still bears
upon us in this latest age, and still it shows itself
by the old tokens. A divine discontent invades
our souls, and, even in the midst of all the best

12 THE UNCHANGING FAITH.

satisfactions which this earth can give, makes mere enjoy
ment base and abhorrent. Everywhere, henceforward, we
must see Him — where the throng of pleasure-seekers is
thickest, where the manifold music of this world is most
clearly heard, where the sunlight of fortune shines most
brightly. He fills our vision — stern as the Judgment
Day and yet infinitely gentle ; sad with the sadness of
Gethsemane, and yet rejoicing with the joy unspeakable
of victorious love ; solemn as Golgotha, yet transfigured
by Easter glory; Victim, Master, Judge, Eternal King.
No more can we enjoy wealth, and vaunt of success, and
exult in the rewards of ambition — these things are
smitten with an intolerable meanness when we must
always see them in His presence Who died on Calvary,
and lives for ever. So He is still giving us the old signs.
Still, as in those first days, men rise at His call, and
leave father, mother, wife, children, possessions, to dare,
and suffer, and die for Him. He remains the one magnet
of magnanimous service, which does not lose its virtue
with the passing of ages and the change of conditions.
I speak with assurance, for behind my words are the
affirmations of experience. The present delivers a
witness accordant \\ ith the witness of the past. Here,
in this great shrine, the imperishable glory of Christian
service is attested by the memorials of many generations;
here, in the audience of the blessed dead who are in
His hand, beyond the frontiers of the world, we take up
the oracle of the first age, and make it the Creed of our
own. "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and to-day,
yea, and for ever."

And when from the present 1 turn to the future, I

SUPREMACY OF CHRIST. 13

see no reason for doubting the permanence of this
unique influence. The searching criticism of the New
Testament does not endanger it : for thereby the tran
scendent superiority of Jesus is thrown into more
luminous prominence. The gulf between the Gospels
and the Epistles grows daily broader ; the difference is
not in degree but in kind. Apostolic doctrines enjoy no
immunity from the common fate of all human teaching :
they fall into obsoleteness, and are silently surrendered :
but the teachings of the Gospel are still fresh and living.
Christ's character still commands the homage of the
general conscience : His example is still owned to be
the only worthy exposition of human duty. " Religion,"
in the striking words of John Stuart Mill, " cannot be
said to have made a bad choice in pitching on this man
as the ideal representative and guide of humanity : nor,
even now, would it be easy, even for an unbeliever, to
find a better translation of the rule of virtue from the
abstract into the concrete than so to live that Christ
would approve our life."1

Harnack says the literal truth when he briefly
declares that Christ Himself is Christianity. Thus
the essential and abiding form of Christ's religion is
not an orthodoxy but a discipleship. " The essence
of the matter is a personal life which awakens life
around it as the fire of one torch kindles another."2
And plainly this Christianity of genuine discipleship,
renewing on the earth the character and conduct of
Jesus, provokes against itself neither the suspicions of

1 Three Essays on Religion, p. 255.
* Hist, of Dogma, vol. i. p. 71.

i4 THE UNCHANGING FAITH.

the intellect, nor the resentments of the conscience.
And not less evidently is it capable of universal accept
ance. It is precisely the catholic principle within
historic Christianity. Everything else — churches,
creeds, theologies, disciplines, liturgies — is limited,
local, temporal, ethnical, political, anything save what
is so boldly claimed and so fondly asserted — catholic.
But this influence of Jesus is absolutely independent of
all such limitations. It exerts its salutary empire over
human nature as such. " All are one man in Christ
Jesus." In spite of failures and blunders without
number Christian missions have demonstrated the
absolute universality of the power of Christ to arrest,
possess, and govern men. Therefore, I submit that on
the two-fold basis of history and experience we may
build again our palace of hope, and make our venture of
faith.

The twentieth century will witness many departures.
Institutions which now seem to stand firmly will
crumble and fall : incalculable changes will re-order
society, possibly for the better. The Greek sage spoke
a truth, which authenticates itself afresh to every
generation, when he dwelt on the ceaseless movement
and mutation of the universe — " Nothing abides : all
things fleet. Life is a river into which no man can twice
dip his feet." The twentieth century must witness far-
reaching changes in the creeds and churches of
Christendom. It would be an excessive expectation to
hope that any of these will hold their own without
alterations and transformations, unimaginably great.
There will be one exception to this general fate. The

SUPREMACY OF CHRIST. 15

personal influence of Jesus Christ will continue still to
shape character and inspire sacrifice. " Heaven and
earth shall pass away : but My Word shall not pass
away." Here is the world's hope ; here is the pledge
that in the future the springs of character and heroism
will not fail us. "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday,
and to-day, yea, and for ever."

THE PARADOX OF CHRISTIANITY.

Preached in Westminster Abbey, January 13/Xf, 1901.

BEHOLD, MY SERVANT SHALL DEAL WISELY, HE SHALL HE
EXALTED AND LIFTED UP, AND SHALL BE VERY HIGH. LIKE AS
MANY WERE ASTONIED AT THEE (HIS VISAGE WAS SO MARRED
MOKE THAN ANY MAN, AND HIS FORM MORE THAN THE SONS OF
MEN), SO SHALL HE SPRINKLE MANY NATIONS; KINGS SHALL
SHUT THEIR MOUTHS AT HIM : FOR THAT WHICH HAD NOT BEEN
TOLD THEM SHALL THEY SEE: AND THAT WHICH THEY HAD NOT
HEARD SHALL THEY UNDERSTAND. — Isaitlh Hi. 1.5-15.

THE solemn prophecy of which these words form
both the preface and the summary falls on our ears
at this glad season of Epiphany with something of
the shock of an unwelcome surprise. " It looks," said
Delitzsch of this passage, " as if it had been written
beneath the Cross on Golgotha." Why should it be
set hard by the "courtly stable" of the new-born
Saviour, where shepherds are reporting the visit of the
herald angels, and the Magi are opening their treasures,
and presenting gifts ? Why must the shadow of
Calvary fall at once on the cradle of Bethlehem ?
Why must the chill of the great rejection pierce that
chosen sanctuary of human hope — the chamber of
infancy? Here surely the abhorred enigma of failure

EPIPHANY AND PASSION. 17

may be excluded, and we may dream dreams of joy
without disturbance.

In the noblest stanzas of his sublime " Hymn on
Christ's Nativity " — surely the worthiest gift of all
that the sacred Muse, inspired by that great theme,
has given to men — Milton brings together in eloquent
combination the splendour and the pathos of that
divine birth, so rich in promise and so pledged to
affliction. All heaven opens on the poet's vision, and
yet between the vision and its fulfilment falls the
inexplicable shadow of the passion.

" Yea, Truth and Justice then

Will down return to men,
Orb'd in a rainbow ; and, like glories wearing,
Mercy will sit betxveen,
Throned in celestial sheen,

With radiant feet the tissued clouds down steering ;
And heaven, as at some festival,
Will open wide the gates of her high palace hall.

" But wisest Fate says no,
This must not yet be so ;
The Babe yet lies in smiling infancy,
That on the bitter cross
Must redeem our loss ;
So both Himself and us to glorify ;

Yet first, to those ychain'd in sleep,
The wakeful trump of doom must thunder through the
deep."

Yet there is a deep fitness in this collocation of
Christ's Epiphany and the great prophecy of His
passion, for the latter declares with solemn emphasis
the mode of the former.

The Incarnation of the Divine Word was no sudden
portent, breaking in, so to say, violently on the order

G.U. C

i8 THE PARADOX OF CHRISTIANITY.

of human history : nor did it involve any disturbance
of the normal conditions of human life. Christ was
born into the claims, and hopes, and disadvantages
of an historic position. He, too, as the rest of His
brethren, was carried on to the stage of the world
by the tide of time, and He, as they, had to fulfil
His mission under the circumstances of His own age.
The Incarnation happened at the precise moment in
human history when the world was prepared for it.
The Redeemer came of a nation and a family ; His
ministry was no isolated thing, but the climax of a
long-continued process : His teaching was given under
forms provided for Him : He ministered His revelation
in modes which were ready to His hand : His example
was set forth by means of a normal human life in
Palestine so many centuries ago. " When the fulness
of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a
woman, born under the law, that He might redeem
them which were under the law, that we might receive
the adoption of sons."

The education of the world for the Incarnation is
a familiar thought to the writers of the New Testament.
Let me add to the words of S. Paul, which I have just
quoted, the striking declaration with which the Epistle
to the Hebrews begins : " God, having of old time spoken
unto the fathers in the prophets by divers portions and
in divers manners, hath at the end of these days spoken
unto us in His Son." It is not necessary to suppose
that the prophets, who thus paved the way for the
Incarnation, were only found within the narrow limits
of one national history : the generous doctrine of the

PR^PARATIO EVANGELICA. 19

Book of Wisdom cannot be so understood, and it may
serve to show that the deepest thinkers of Israel in
that age had largely shaken themselves free from the
prevailing narrowness. The Divine Wisdom, we read,
" from generation to generation passing into holy souls,
maketh men friends of God and prophets." This wider
view of the Pneparatio Evangelica established itself
among the Hellenizing Jews of the Dispersion, and
was adopted into the Christian Church. S. Clement
of Alexandria, who at the close of the second century
presided over the famous catechetical school in that
great centre of Greek thought, taught his pupils to
regard philosophy as serving for the Greeks the same
educative purpose as that which the Mosaic Law
served for the Jews. " The way of truth is one," he
said, " but into it as into a never-failing river flow the
streams from all sides."

But, plainly, it was within the sphere of Israel's
history that the process of preparation was most
continuous and direct, for "of Israel is Christ as
concerning the flesh, Who is over all, God blessed for
ever." In that process the principal agents were the
prophets, and among that "goodly fellowship" perhaps
the first place is held by the forgotten seer whose work
is included in the canonical book of Isaiah. That the
last twenty-seven chapters of the book are not the
work of Isaiah seems to be now generally agreed
among critical scholars, and I shall assume it here
and adopt the view, which seems to me justified by
overwhelming arguments, that those chapters were
written towards the close of the Babylonian exile.

C 2

20 THE PARADOX OF CHRISTIANITY.

Hebrew prophecy was ever the creature of its own
age : it reflected and, under the inspiration of the
Holy Spirit, interpreted actual experience. Thus
the key to its interpretation is the knowledge of the
contemporary history. History, in fact, is the hand
maid of exegesis : and the reason why the Minor
Prophets remain so unintelligible is, in great part, our
ignorance of the circumstances out of which they grew
and to which they were addressed. The interpreter
is not in a position to begin his work without so much
knowledge : and, therefore, no work deserves better
of the Church than that of critical and historical
students, who are cutting the springs of error and
drying up the sources of fanaticism by making possible
that rational understanding of the sacred text which
must be the basis of all sound teaching and serviceable
exhortation. This unknown prophet of the Exile had
learned in the school of trouble : his faith had been
tried in the furnace of affliction : and through that
schooling and testing the Holy Ghost had taught him
truths which, perhaps, under happier circumstances,
he could never have known. He is an intensely
patriotic Jew, holding with passionate ardour that
belief in the Divine election and glorious destiny of
Israel which, from the dawn of its history, had stamped
so distinctive a character on his nation. But his belief
seemed to be contradicted by experience. The logic
of facts seemed to disallow his creed. Israel, as a
nation, had been blotted out : all the recognised tokens
of nationality had been taken away. Monarch)-,
Church, fatherland — all had been lost. The relics of

THE MESSIANIC HOPE. 21

the Chosen People were, and had been for more than
a generation, exiles in the oppressor's land. Israel
was fitly symbolized by the bleaching bones of Ezekiel's
vision : " there were very many in the open valley : and,
lo, they were very dry."

It was impossible for the prophet to conceive the
destiny of his race quite in the same way as those older
prophets, whose ministry was fulfilled in the midst of a
vigorous and sometimes splendid national life. So we
notice a distinct movement of thought. The messianic
hope is expressed in a new way. The glorious monarch,
reigning from Zion over a tributary world, who had filled
the horizon of Isaiah, fades from the vision of his great
successor, and is replaced by the more mysterious,
pathetic, sombre figure of Jehovah's Servant. At first
it is the whole nation which he so describes, as in the
forty-first chapter, where he represents Jehovah as
addressing Israel in terms of affectionate reassurance :
" Thou Israel, My servant, Jacob whom I have chosen,
the seed of Abraham My friend : thou whom I have
taken hold of from the ends of the earth, and called thee
from the corners thereof, and said unto thee, Thou art
My servant, I have chosen thee : I have not cast thee
away : fear thou not."

But soon he limits his meaning. The eloquent facts
prohibit the notion that the people, as a whole, are the
chosen of God. The people, for the most part, are
content to be slaves, content to flourish ignobly under
the rule of the alien. There arc but few who will rise to
meet the chance <>f deliverance when il comes, few who
really care for the spiritual destiny of Israel. So the

22 THE PARADOX OF CHRISTIANITY.

prophet turns away from the apostate nation, and fastens
on this loyal minority. This is the Servant of Jehovah,
to whom His mission is given, who, in the sequel, may
realise the national destiny in spite of the general failure.
This " Israel after the Spirit," to borrow S. Paul's phrase,
would inherit those promises of triumph which " Israel
after the flesh " had despised. So in chapter forty-nine
the Lord's Servant is spoken about in terms which
assume his distinctness from Israel. "He saith, It is
too light a thing that thou shouldest be My servant to
raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved
of Israel : I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles."
As the prophet pursues this great and fruitful thought,
that it is only in the faithful remnant, which mourns the
general sin, and holds firmly to the national hope, that
the vocation of Israel shall be obeyed, he yields more
and more to the personifying tendency of the Hebrew
mind. He speaks of the Servant of Jehovah in language
which seems to require an individual experience, and
the supreme example of this personification is the great
prophecy before us. The question inevitably arises
whether the prophet has not here passed beyond per
sonification into portraiture ; whether, to his illuminated
mind, the knowledge has not been vouchsafed that the
realization of Israel's destiny will be secured not in a
minority of patriots, but in a supreme Person. Certainly
the personification has become here so complete that
even many of those critics who repudiate the Christian
view find themselves compelled to conjecture some
other person than Jesus Christ to satisfy the language.
Hezekiah, Josiah, Jeremiah, Isaiah himself have all been

THE SERVANT OF JEHOVAH. 23

suggested. Matthew Arnold thought that " we have
here for the original subject of this chapter a martyred
servant of God, recognisable by the Jews of the Exile
under the allusions here made to him, who eminently
fulfilled the ideal of the servant of God, the true Israel,
the mediator of the people and the light of the Gentiles,
presented in this series of chapters ; and whose death,
crowning his life and reaching men's hearts, made an
epoch of victory for this ideal."1

The question of the Ethiopian eunuch, whom the
evangelist accosted on his return from Jerusalem, rises
involuntarily in the student's mind, and seems to forbid
the supposition that the personified remnant of Israel
is the subject of the prophecy. " I pray thee, of whom
speaketh the prophet this ? of himself or of some other."
The astonishing wealth of detail in this portrait of
the suffering Servant, who through his sufferings works
redemption for the people, scarcely accords with the
notion that it is nothing more than a sketch of the ideal
righteous man, such as that memorable description in
The Republic of Plato, which may in some sense be
considered a Greek parallel to the Jewiih prophecy.
The older Jewish interpreters understood the words as
applicable to the Messiah, and it was manifestly their
strong resentment against Christianity which induced
the later rabbis to repudiate that application. Dr.
Cheyne, who among our English scholars holds the
principal place as an exponent of the Book of Isaiah,
speaks with no excessive emphasis of the " extraordi
nary distinctness " with which this prophecy before us
1 Isaiah, p. 133.

24 THE PARADOX OF CHRISTIANITY.

" prefigures the life of Jesus Christ" ; and the enormous
weight attached from the earliest antiquity by Christian
apologists to the argument from prophecy finds here its
strongest justification.

The supremacy of the canonical Isaiah among the
prophets in the regard of the Church, both ancient and
modern, is based mainly on his evangelical character.
S. Augustine relates that when he wrote to S. Ambrose
after his conversion, inquiring what Scriptures he ought
to read in order to prepare himself for baptism, he was
recommended to study the writings of Isaiah. In his
famous treatise On the City of God he marshals the
evidence of fulfilled predictions, and gives to Isaiah a
principal place in his argument. Isaiah, he says, was
by many called an evangelist rather than a prophet.
The canonical Isaiah, whom the Christian fathers
regarded with such homage, was really less the prophet
of that name than his unknown successor. It has been
pointed out that while the canonical Isaiah "is of all
Old Testament writers the one far most quoted in the
New," yet it is "in the last twenty-seven chapters that
the greatest interest is reached, insomuch that out of
thirty-four passages from him which Gesenius brings
together as quoted in the New Testament, there are
twenty-one from these last chapters against only thirteen
from the rest of the book."1 The general usage of
Christendom, we may add, has in this respect closely
followed the New Testament. It is the anonymous
prophecy incorporated in the canonical book which
gives to Isaiah his primacy in the regard of believers.
1 M. Arnold, fstiitth, p. 3

THE APPEAL TO PROPHECY. 25

I freely acknowledge that S. Augustine and his
contemporaries held a view of prophecy which can
no longer without much modification maintain its
ground, and that many, perhaps most, of the predictions
which they produced can no longer serve the purpose
of Christian apology ; but none the less, placing side by
side the solemn and penetrating prophecy which has
been read from the lectern, and the life of Jesus Christ,
I cannot doubt that the Church has been right in
maintaining that there is an intimate and fruitful con
nection between them. The appeal to prophecy cannot
be regarded as obsolete, however much it may have
changed its form, so long as from the pages of the
prophets we can produce this vivid portrait of "the
Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world" —
a portrait painted on the prophetic canvas more than
five centuries before the Baptist hailed the Son of Mary
by that sublime and eloquent title. And that appeal
unquestionably retains great authority with the mass of
men. When Bishop Burnet read to the dying Earl of
Rochester the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah, the Earl was
immediately convinced of the truth, which the good
prelate's arguments had not availed to commend to him.
" He said to me," relates Burnet, " that as he heard it
read, he felt an inward force upon him which did so
enlighten his mind and convince him that he could
resist it no longer. For the words had an authority
which did shoot like Raies or Beams in his mind ; so
that he was not only convinced by the Reasonings he
had about it, which satisfied his understanding, but by a
power uhich did su effectually restrain him that ho did

26 THE PARADOX OF CHRISTIANITY.

ever after as firmly believe in his Saviour, as if he had
seen Him in the Clouds."1

I said, at the beginning of my sermon, that there is a
deep fitness in the collocation of Christ's Epiphany and
the great prophecy of His passion because the latter
declares with solemn emphasis the mode of the former.
Read, then, our text as the key to Christ's manifestation.
The crowded margin of the Revised Version sufficiently
indicates the obscurity of the passage, but the general
sense is plain enough. The prophet begins by announc
ing the glorious triumph which shall in the end belong
to Jehovah's servant. " Behold, My servant shall deal
wisely : He shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be
very high." But this exaltation in victory will have
been achieved by the most unlikely methods ; it will
have grown out of a career which seemed predestined to
failure ; it will confound and invalidate the calculations of
human wisdom. By an abrupt transition the prophet leads
us from the glorious spectacle of the triumphant Messiah
to the strange, incongruous, darkly suggestive career
of the historic Christ. " Like as many were astonished
at Thee (His visage was so marred more than any man,
and His form more than the sons of men) so shall He
sprinkle many nations." How deeply have the prophet's
words graven themselves on the hearts of believers, who
read them ever side by side with the sombre comment
of Golgotha ! The whole pageant of outrage in which
the Son of Man is the central figure rises on our
view as we read of that " visage so marred more than

1 Some Passages of Life and Death <>/ J^/tti, Karl nf Rochester,
p. 190.

PROPHETIC PORTRAITURE. 27

any man and that form more than the "sons of men."
Yea, whether the prophet grasped his own greatness
or not, we who read his words through the crosses on
Calvary cannot doubt that they are portraiture, and not
personification. The amazement caused by this
paradox of so complete a victory won through means
of such piteous disaster is now described.

" So shall He sprinkle many nations." It seems
evident that we must abandon this rendering, borrowed
from the Vulgate, and richly embroidered with devout
applications, and adopt the rendering of the revisers'
margin. One great authority goes so far as to say that
" it is simply treason against the Hebrew language to
render ' sprinkle.' " Delitzsch more cautiously allows
the excellent sense and many attractions of the
traditional rendering, but decides, in deference to the
usage of the language, to follow the majority of the
commentators in adopting the alternative rendering ;
and with him agree our English scholars ; so that we
may without misgiving follow in the wake of modern
scholarship by reading "startle" instead of "sprinkle."
" So shall He startle many nations : kings shall shut
their mouths at Him," i.e., shall sink into awestruck
silence in His presence, "for that which had not been
told them shall they see : and that which they had not
heard shall they understand."

The best commentary on the prophet's words is the
challenge of the Christian apostle: "Where is the
wise ? where is the scribe ? where is the disputer of this
world ? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of the
world ? " Christianity is a history of paradox ; and

28 THE PARADOX OF CHRISTIANITY.

when closely examined the paradox of that history is
the paradox of Christ. Victory is through defeat ;
restoration is through humiliation ; strength is through
weakness ; life is through death.

There is one aspect of Christian history which at
once arrests the student. It is curiously normal,
disappointingly commonplace. The Church is one
human society among the rest, reflecting faithfully
enough the too familiar features of the common
fortune. It takes the colour of the civilization in
which it exists : it is bent to the service of political,
dynastic, even commercial interests ; it is the too-
patient victim of human fraud, covetousness, and
ambition ; it falls into effeteness, grows obnoxious to
many resentments, perishes in the storm of avenging
revolutions, or stagnates in an irrecoverable decline.
That is, perhaps, the aspect of ecclesiastical history
which first arrests the student, and it is profoundly
depressing. Woe to the student who sees no other !
For a deeper insight gives a juster view ; a wider
knowledge enables a more equitable judgment.

There is another aspect of Christian history to be
reckoned with : Christian history is the Epiphany of
Christ, and that continues in the inexorable groove of
paradox in which it began. External disaster is still
ministerial to moral victory. The spiritual successes of
the Church stand in curiously close relation to her
political defeats. S. Paul's bold and ardent language
is capable of a literal application to the history of
Christianity. " We know that to them that love God all
things work together for good." This aspect of Christian

THE WITNESS OF HISTORY. 29

history eludes the notice and baffles the understanding
of statesmen. In their treasury of political precedents
they can discover none to guide them when they find
themselves confronted with Christian conviction, and
under censure of the Christian conscience. Persecution
fails, for "the blood of martyrs is the seed of the Church."
The subtler and more malignant policy of corruption
fails ; for scandals in the Church never fail to drive
Christians back to their true strength, the Gospel of
the life of Jesus, and from that inexhaustible store
house of moral energy to draw the forces of spiritual
recover}-. Christianity is always on the verge of a final
catastrophe ; the prophets of the hour are constantly
announcing its destruction ; but Christianity lives still,
and will live for ever, because, in spite of all the
admixture of alien elements, in spite of scandals, old
and new, corruption, laxity, effeteness, it is ordained to
be the great instrument of Christ's Epiphany, the powers
of the Incarnation are active in it, the purposes of
eternity are finding in it their slow but certain fulfil
ment. The paradox which tries the believer's faith, con
founds the statesman's wisdom, eludes the philosophers
thought, has its origin and interpretation in the condi
tions of the Divine Epiphany in Jesus Christ. It is the
historic expression of the paradox which prophecy fore
told and which the Gospel exhibited, the paradox of the
Incarnation, the paradox of a Redeemer who wields the
might of Godhead in and through a manhood which is
perfected through sufferings, the paradox of "Jesus
Christ and Him crucified."

CHRISTIAN VERSATILITY.

Funeral Sermon for Bishop Creighton, preached in Westminster
Abbey, January 2o/A, 1901.

BRETHREN, I COUNT NOT MYSELF YET TO HAVE APPREHENDED :
BUT ONE THING I DO, FORGETTING THE THINGS WHICH ARE
BEHIND, AND STRETCHING FORWARD TO THE THINGS WHICH ARE
BEFORE, I PRESS ON TOWARD THE GOAL OF THE HIGH CALLING

OF GOD IN JESUS CHRIST.— Philippians iii. 13, 14.

THESE words confess the secret of the most fruitful
Christian life that the record of history contains. They
give the key of S. Paul's career ; they enable us to
understand that extraordinary feature of his writings
which renders them so fascinating and so difficult, the
subtle, constant, and rapid progress of thought. That
feature is the expression of a mind, singularly lucid,
direct and versatile, wonderfully open to new impressions,
eagerly hospitable to new ideas, greatly sympathetic, and
keenly sensitive.

In S. Paul the qualities of head and heart curiously
affect each other. The rigorous logic is always tending
to yield to the ardours of a passionate conviction ; the
conclusions, which have mastered the affections and
become the law-givers of conduct, are constantly held
back to wait the tortuous progress of an argument,
required to satisfy the claims of a powerful and exacting

S. PAUL'S CAREER. 31

intellect. Progress of thought compelled revision of
standpoints, and this in turn required change of
opinion, until the apostle's career assumed an appearance
of instability and incoherence which puz/.led his admirers,
exasperated his colleagues, and moved the scorn of his
opponents ; but, none the less, S. Paul's life was a real
unity ; the changes of opinion were determined by an
unchanging principle ; there was throughout an under
lying oneness of aim. His was the consistency, not of a
partisan, or a fanatic, but of a disciple. His law of life
was to learn, to move on from the partial and limited
views of a beginner to the juster perceptions and
worthier appreciations of a scholar who has mastered
the elements and is entering into his Teacher's
mind.

Religion was to S. Paul a true discipleship to a living
Master, infinitely beyond him in wisdom, knowledge,
and holiness, who yet came into closest fellowship with
his daily life by virtue of the passionate love which He
kindled in his heart. Day by day, as experience
enlarged his mind and purged his vision, he learned to
know Christ better, to grasp His teachings more firmly,
to understand His thoughts, to see the bearings of His
example, and thus he found himself continually growing
out of mental attitudes which had once seemed inevitable,
and casting aside opinions which had once seemed true,
continually turning his back on the precedents and
pledges of his own past, and disappointing the hopes
and expectations based on his own behaviour. He was
an inconsistent man, and he knew it, but he had his
defence in the fact of his discipleship. He could not

32 CHRISTIAN VERSATILITY.

help it ; to be a disciple of Christ was to be always
moving forward, always becoming disgusted with actual
attainment and stretching out eagerly for something
higher, worthier, better. So to the complaints of nervous
and puzzled friends, and the denunciations of scornful
and embittered foes, he returns this apology of disciple-
ship : " He is ordained to call and I to come ! "
" Howbeit what things were gain to me, these have I
counted loss for Christ." He glances back over those
years since that great choice was made ; every one is
burnt into his memory by some distinctive affliction; for
one moment he sees again all that he had sacrificed on
the altar of discipleship — the love of friends, the con
fidence of superiors, the applause of his nation, a suc
cessful career, and he faces again the old decision in the
sinister light of the troubles and privations it had cost,
and then he reaffirms it : " Yea, verily, and I count all
things to be loss for the excellency of the knowledge of
Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I suffered the loss of
all things, and do count them but refuse that I may gain
Christ." Inconsistencies, changes of opinion, re-orderings
of life, disappointments of expectations — here is the
explanation and excuse for them all : " Brethren, I
count not myself yet to have apprehended ; but one
thing I do, forgetting the things which are behind, and
stretching forward to the things which are before, I press
on toward the goal unto the prize of the high calling of
God in Christ Jesus."

S. Paul does not stand alone. He is but the con
spicuous example of the general law of progress which
governs all human advance. Advance whether in

TIMES OF TRANS;iTi;ON. 33

knowledge or in goodness involves a twofold process :
on the one hand, the repudiation of the false ; on the
other, the acquisition of the true. We surrender the
past as we assimilate the present. Stagnation means
intellectual sterility : self-satisfaction means moral
decline.

"No, when the fight begins within himself
A man's worth something. God stoops o'er his head,
Satan looks up between his feet both tug —
He's left, himself, i' the middle : the soul wakes
And grows. Prolong that battle through his life !
Never leave growing till the life to come ! "

Discipleship, then, as involving intellectual and moral
advance, necessitates and excuses large inconsistencies ;
but, in the case of the apostle, there was this further
circumstance, that he was living in a time of transition.
At such a time inconsistency is fostered by the per
plexed and incoherent state of society. In an epoch
of change loyalty to principles will involve continual
departure from precedents. The broad highways of
thought and action fail, and the traveller must pursue
his journey across country, bearing forward, indeed, in
his determined course, but compelled to make a
thousand deviations by the difficulty of the ground, and
the unsuspected obstacles — river, swamp, and thicket —
which he encounters. Transition times, then, demand
and develop versatility. No doubt great dangers
attach to this necessary and gracious quality. The
versatile man is tempted to be superficial, to escape
from problems by his nimble intelligence, rather than
face and solve them. He is readily drawn away into

G.U. D

34 CHRISTIAN VERSATILITY.

the service of ambition ; for the potentialities of his own
powers are revealed to him in the common procedure
of life, and he discovers how short are the cuts by which
superior wit can attain to success. He is tempted to
pride — the pride of intellectual scorn, the pride of
knowledge provoked by the ignorance, stupidity, pre
judice, obstinacy, of lesser men. Superficiality, ambition,
contempt — these are the familar features of a transitional
age, when the existing institutions and systems of
thought have lost authority, and men have not yet
found any adequate substitutes.

Versatility, if it is to escape these contaminations,
must be something worthier than the quality by which
clever men imagine expedients for every juncture, and
find a way of escape from every difficulty. The
versatility of a disciple does not express itself in
opportunism. It is based on the conviction that
experience is the teacher of duty, that Christ is "the
Way, the Truth, and the Life" under the novel con
ditions of the latest age as certainly as in that age
which witnessed and recorded His life on earth.
Christian versatility implies conviction of the plenary
resources of Christianity, and involves loyalty to all the
circumstances of human society. Versatility, if it is to
be a practical force for good, and not merely a pleasing
and kindly temperament, must be conditioned by
adequate knowledge. It is the quality indicated by
Christ Himself, when He compared the scribe who had
been made a disciple to the kingdom of heaven to a
" householder which bringeth out of his treasure things
new and old." Versatility is always shadowed by

MISJUDGMENT OF VERSATILITY. 35

suspicion, and pursued by calumny. The fanatical, the
merely stupid, the cynical, will all, from their different
standpoints, misunderstand the versatile Christian. His
intellectual range will offend them, and his catholic
sympathy, and his indifference to convention, and his
ready acceptance of change. He will be accused of
frivolity, of doubtful orthodoxy, of chronic inconsistency.
He will be a dangerous man, over whom oppugnant
zealots will shake their heads ; but he will none the less
stand in the succession of the best Christians of every
age ; in his time and place he will continue the work to
which the subtlest Christian thinkers have, from one
generation to another, given themselves. With S. Paul
he will be able to say that his versatility had its roots
and its limits in discipleship. " I am become all things
to all men, that I may by all means save some. And I
do all things for the gospel's sake."

As I speak, I am conscious that your thoughts are
outrunning my words. We meet to-day under the
shadow of a great sorrow, in the consternation of a
heavy and sudden loss. The most versatile and brilliant
of English prelates has been taken away in the noon
tide of his powers, in the climax of his opportunities,
at the height of his influence. The great diocese
at our doors has lost from its head the one man
who, by universal consent, was marked out con
spicuously from his contemporaries as competent for
that great position. In any case, we of this venerable
church could hardly withhold from our fellow-church
men in the neighbouring diocese of London the
expression of our sympathy in so grave an affliction ;

D 2

36 CHRISTIAN VERSATILITY.

but on this occasion I feel that I should fail in my duty
if I did not utter in this pulpit the deep regret with
which not merely his own diocese, but the whole Church
and nation, receive the lamentable death of Bishop
Creighton. You will bear with me, then, if this after
noon I turn from the natural course of my preaching to
dwell on this inevitable and unwelcome theme.

Of the individual aspect of the event I shall say
little. The eloquent facts need no commentary. Death
comes to men variously : in early youth, in strong
manhood, in the weakness and desertion of old age ; it
comes under diverse circumstances of anguish, of glory,
of shame. It is welcomed as a release, or resented as
an outrage ; but always it faces us as an enigma and a
challenge. I shall not dilate on the humiliation which
death brings on human pride, on the affliction it pours
into human hearts, on the wreckage and confusion it
causes in human society. Let it suffice to point out
that death never seems a more hopeless enigma, and a
more triumphant challenge, than when it breaks in
violently upon a life inspired by high purpose, dedicated
to large and important works, weighted by heavy
responsibilities. Such a life was that which has been
cut short within the last week. Everything that could
make a life valuable met in Bishop Creighton. His
death is as untimely and disastrous from the standpoint
of the public interest as it is deeply tragic from that of
the individual and the family. Let me dwell for a few
minutes on the public loss.

It is a commonplace that the brief episcopate which
has reached its end has been marked by a grave and

THE CRISIS IN THE CHURCH. 37

anxious crisis in the Church of England. The departed
prelate will be remembered mainly in connexion with
the episodes of that crisis. Perhaps the contending
zealots who have troubled the peace of the Church have
hardly realised the nature of the difficulties which their
reckless ardour and intolerant bigotry forced into view.
The Church of England is the guardian of interests far
greater than they, absorbed in their petty partisanships,
can appreciate. Behind the actual situation in which
we find ourselves lies an ecclesiastical history absolutely
unique : the anomalies of present experience have their
roots, their excuses, their interpretation, in the past ; they
may have their value in the future. A crisis which
brought into prominence, and endowed with a measure
of authority, the most bigoted and ignorant sections of
the religious public threatened the Church with a grave
disaster. Moreover, we are living — it cannot be too
often pressed on the minds of English churchmen — in
a time of transition. Christianity, if it is to retain the
allegiance of men trained in the science and philosophy
of the age, must be reorganised and restated ; and the
essential conditions of a reorganisation and restatement
which shall be honest, adequate, and lasting are patience
knowledge, and liberty. The Church of England, in
spite of obvious defects and some evident abuses, pro
vides these conditions. I see no other church of which
this can be said with equal truth, for there is no other
church which, without treason to its own past, without
rejecting any part of its catholic heritage, faces the
future with such noble traditions of service and toler
ance, such varied knowledge, and such ample liberty.

38 CHRISTIAN VERSATILITY.

In the interest, then, of Christianity, in the interest of
the highest elements of the national life, in the interest
of humanity itself, the Church of England must be held
together, and preserved intact.

But here emerge the practical difficulties. The Church
of England inherits a precarious political position and
an obsolete system of law, and (we must add) internal
divisions which, alas ! are not obsolete. Impregnable
against assaults from without, she is the most vulnerable

o *

of all churches to assaults from within. Anglicanism is
at once the most fragile and the most precious of all the
historic varieties of the religion of Christ. Its preser
vation is an arduous task ; its destruction would involve
an irreparable loss. I have said enough to show how
difficult is the duty of those who now are charged with
the government of the Church of England. We want
in our bishops a large patience, a just insight, a far-seeing
wisdom, an iron will. We want men who can read the
signs of the times by the light of wide historical know
ledge, who can maintain their ground against the sudden
storms of popular passion and the delusive enthusiasms
of partisans. We want men who can grasp the ultimate
issues of the conflicts of the hour ; who understand and
believe in the possibilities of Anglicanism ; who can
apply to ecclesiastical affairs the blended caution and
courage of the highest secular statesmanship.

I submit that Bishop Creighton, beyond any of his
contemporaries, seemed to satisfy these conditions of
a great bishop. He was a true Anglican, appreciating,
with the justice born of an intimate knowledge of
Anglican history, the conditions under which our

BISHOP CREIGHTON'S ANGLICANISM. 39

anomalies have grown up, and our opportunities have
come to us. I may apply to him some words from his
own subtle and fascinating study of Pope Pius II., to
whose strangely blended character he evidently felt a
strong attraction : —

" The study of history was to him the source of
instruction in life, the basis for the formation of his
character. He looked upon events with reference to
their results in the future, and his actions were regulated
by a strong sense of historical proportion. Similarly,
the present was to him always the product of the past,
and he shaped his motives by reference to historical
antecedents. It was probably this historical point of
view which made him engage in so many schemes,
because he felt that, when once affairs were in move
ment, the skilful statesman might be able to re.ip some
permanent advantage. He was not willing to let slip
any opportunity which might afford an opening for his
political dexterity. Had he been less of a student, had
his mind been less fertile, he might have concentrated
his energies more successfully on one supreme object." l

In a fanatical atmosphere, Bishop Creighton remained
absolutely free from any taint of fanaticism. He did
not compromise his claims to the public confidence by
a too ardent advocacy of any cause which could be
justly described as a partisan cause ; but he laboured
for peace with unwearied effort. Some words of
Erasmus, written in 1523, when the conflicts of the
Reformation were beginning, well express his attitude :

" I cannot help hating dissension and loving peace.
1 Vide Hist, of r<if>acy, vol. ii., p. 489

4o CHRISTIAN VERSATILITY.

I see how obscure all human affairs are. I see how
much easier it is to stir up confusion than to allay it.
I have learned how many are the devices of Satan. I
should not clare to trust my own spirit in all things, and
I am far from being able to pronounce with certainty on
the spirit of another. I would that all might strive
together for the triumph of Christ and the peace of the
Gospel, and that without violence, but in truth and
reason, we might take counsel both for the dignity of
the priesthood and for the liberty of the people, whom
our Lord Jesus desired to be free. To those who go
about to this end to the best of their ability Erasmus
shall not be wanting. But if anyone desires to throw
everything into confusion, he shall not have me either
for a leader or a companion." 1

You will pardon me for dwelling on these traits of
the deceased prelate. Here at least, in this venerable
church, the preacher can never be indifferent to the
worth of historical studies, for here he must deliver his
message amid the treasured memorials of the national
past, in an atmosphere heavily charged with noble, and
splendid, and pathetic associations. And surely it is
in Westminster Abbey that the large-hearted tolerance
which marked Bishop Creighton may best be appreciated,
for large-hearted tolerance is the characteristic note of
this the most famous of all English churches. If any
man \vould understand the true greatness of Anglicanism,
let him turn a deaf ear to the strivings of heated zealots,
and draw aside to these sacred courts, where the National
Church keeps watch and ward over the sainted and
1 Erasmus, p. 360.

ANGLICAN TOLERANCE. 41

illustrious dead. The petty orthodoxies of religious
parties are here unknown : the shibboleths of controversy
have no meaning here. Here sleep together the Anglican,
the Presbyterian, the Wesleyan, even the Agnostic. The
Church of England can find in high character and un
selfish service the sufficient evidences of discipleship. Her
Master's test is enough for her : "By their fruits ye shall
know them." Can as much be said for any other Church ?
I say, then, that in dwelling on the large-minded
tolerance of the late bishop I am lingering over
a familiar and distinctive character of Anglicanism
as we know it here. There will be much need of
that character in the coming time, if the Church
of England is to answer to the various and urgent
demands of the national life. It cannot be in the
future as in the past. A distinguished statesman justly
observed a few days ago that at the Reformation
" theologians of every country and of every denomina
tion . . . agreed in nothing else, agreed in this, that
there should be no such thing as an open question
among Christian men." Hence that "damnosa hereditas"
of theological definitions which hangs as a dead weight
about our necks. The problem of the twentieth century
is the discovery of religious union based on the toler
ance of open questions among Christian men, the firm
tenure of the essential elements of the historic faith,
together with a large surrender of tradition and a frank
adaptation of Christianity to the changed conditions
of human life. It is sad to think that for the solution
of that problem we must no longer look for the strong
wisdom and keen insight and versatile ability of the

42 CHRISTIAN VERSATILITY.

great prelate whom we have lost. We know that
the issues of human lives are in wiser hands than
ours : and we seek grace to accept without repining
this strange Providence. The fruitfulness of an
episcopate cannot be measured by its length, and
there is another and a worthier standard of judgment
for human lives than the number of years. "A righteous
man, though he die before his time, shall be at rest. For
honourable old age is not that which standeth in length
of time, nor is its measure given by number of years :
but understanding is grey hairs unto men, and an
unspotted life is ripe old age." It may be that the
untimely and lamented death of one who had laboured
so devotedly, and with such large patience towards
perversity, for the peace and order of the Church, may
carry an authority which the counsels and commands
of the living prelate never carried. It may be that at
this time of sobering, solemnising grief the thought
may come to some minds that obedience is better than
sacrifice, and very much better than posthumous eulogy.
It may be that remorse will succeed where duty failed.

The last days of Bishop Creighton's active life were
devoted to an earnest effort to bring about a better
mutual understanding between fellow-churchmen, who
had ranged themselves in opposite camps to their
own loss and the great misfortune of the Church.
The "Round Table Conference" failed — perhaps it
was bound to fail ; but there are failures which are
more precious than successes, and I am not sure
that this was not one. In any case, the bishop
bound about his departure the memory of an earnest,

TRAGEDY OF DEATH. 43

affectionate venture for the sake of peace ; and that
memory will continue to encourage men of goodwill,
and shame the sons of strife for years to come. Bishop
Creighton, like Archbishop Tait, will be remembered
as a peacemaker in a time of conflict : and we know
Who has said, " Blessed are the peacemakers ; for they
shall be called sons of God."

I have spoken at length on the public aspects of
our great loss : but I would not have you think that
I am forgetful of the sore private affliction which it
involves. I pray God that in this time of bitter trial
His Holy Spirit may sustain and comfort those whom
His inscrutable will has shadowed with sorrow so
cruel and so deep. For the rest of us, may we not
miss the message of this woe ! There is tragedy
in the death of the strong man in his strength, cut
down in the mid-course of his labours : but in that
tragedy there is nothing mean or unworthy. He dies
as the soldier on the stricken field, with his face to
the foe in the task of his duty. There is a deeper
and more sinister tragedy about the death of him who
is taken away in the disgraceful lethargy of an idle
life, unregardful of duty, unconsecrated to service,
useless to the world. This is the bitterest ingredient
in the mingled draught of human failure, that it might
have been otherwise, that it was meant to be other
wise.

" 1 hear a voice, perchance I heard

Long ago, but all too low,

So that scarce a care it stirred

If the voice were real or no :

I heard it in my youth when first

44 CHRISTIAN VERSATILITY

The waters of my life outburst :

But, now their stream ebbs faint, I hear

That voice, still low, but fata? clear —

As if all poets, God ever meant

Should save the world, and therefore lent

Great gifts to, but who, proud, refused

To do His work, or lightly used

Those gifts, or failed through weak endeavour,

So, mourn cast off by him for ever —

As if these leaned in airy ring

To take me ; this the song they sing.

Lost, lost ! "

From the recent grave in the great cathedral there
rings forth for all who will hearken the solemn summons
to more earnest and arduous living. Would you purge
death from terror and shame ? Then so live that
when it comes it shall find you alert and active on
the tasks of God. There is no other preparation for
death that can make us strong to meet it than this,

" Life that dare send a challenge to its end,
And, when it comes, say, ' Welcome, friend ! ' *

Therefore let us not miss the lesson of our loss. It
is the call to honest and faithful work ; it is the solemn
affirmation of our Master's warning, "We must work
the works of Him that sent me while it is day ; the
night cometh when no man can work."

APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.

Preached on the i/h Sunday after Trinity, June 3O//4, 1901,
in S. Alargarefs, Westminster.

SO THEN, BRETHREN, STAND FAST, AND HOLD THE TRADITIONS
WHICH YE WERE TAUGHT, WHETHER BY WORD OR BY EPISTLE OF

OURS. — 2 Thess ii. 1 5.

Bt'T ABIDE THOU IN THE THINGS WHICH THOU HAST LEARNED
AND HAST BEEN ASSURED OF, KNOWING OF WHOM THOU HAST
LEARNED THEM. — 2 Tim. iii. 14.

I HAVE placed in your hands the announcement
of my design to claim your attention for the next
five Sundays in a sustained attempt to understand
the conditions, principles, and methods of apostolic
Christianity. It may not, perhaps, be unprofitable —
it cannot be untimely — that I should devote my labour
this morning to considering the preliminary question
why such a course of religious inquiry is worth our
undertaking. Why should the modern churchman
concern himself with such distant precedents ? Is it
not obviously irrational to seek in the first century the
solution of the problems of the twentieth ? When,
setting aside pious convention, we look facts in the face,
can it be denied that Christianity, as we know it, is the

46 APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.

product of history, that its creed, its ethics, its institu
tions, its worship, are the creatures of a long development?
Such questions as these are much in men's minds
now ; and, unquestionably, the answers they must
receive are neither confident nor clear. It is notorious
that in two directions contemporary Christendom is
boldly casting off allegiance to the precedents of
Christian history. On the one hand, the Roman Church
has by its new dogma of Infallibility claimed and pro
vided for complete liberty of innovation. There is no
longer any constitutional necessity in that church for
bringing into play the normal conservative agencies.
The last General Council properly ends the series, for
all the powers which historically attach to general
councils are now vested in the pontiff. I do not discuss
the fact, I merely point to it. The Church of Rome is
free of the past, and can shape her own course in the
future. Cardinal Manning's much-criticised dictum has
always seemed to me, from the standpoint of the modern
Roman Catholic, self-evident. " The appeal to history
is itself a heresy." On the other hand, there is a kind red
tendency within the Protestant sphere. We in England
hear much of a Christianity which is described by the
uncouth adjectives "undogmatic" and "undenomina
tional." Without questioning the practical conveniences
of a form of Christianity which ignores the obstinate
and long-standing divergences of Christian belief, and
approves all the vagaries of Christian enthusiasm, I
point out that " undcgmatic and undenominational
Christianity " implies a repudiation of Christian prece
dents, and, not less than the Roman infallibility, secures

THE INCARNATION. 47

complete liberty of innovation. It is a curious and
anxious speculation what transformations may come
upon the Christian religion when thus frankly parted
from its historic connexions ; but on that fascinating
but melancholy theme I must not now dwell. Rather I
would ask whether this general repudiation of the
Christian past does not imply a profound misconception
of Christianity itself, or, to express myself more con
veniently, I would inquire what is the nature of the
authority which has been generally claimed for apostolic
precedents, and how far that authority can be serviceable
to the modern Church.

Let me begin by reminding you that —

i. The supreme assumption of Christianity in all its
forms is the Divine mission of Jesus Christ. Essentially
this is the doctrine of the Incarnation, for it is required
in the perfect fulfilment of the Divine mission that an
intelligible and adequate discovery of the Divine
character and purpose should be made, and this implies
far more than a communicated message. The Divine
word must be interpreted and, in a sense, applied in a
Divine life ; and that life must be set before men in
the familiar terms of human experience.

Christianity is the Gospel of Divine self-revelation :
and it is expressed not in such and such precepts, but in
the whole personality of Jesus Christ. That personality
spoke out in the manifold witness of teaching and
example. Christ was Prophet, Teacher, Master, Friend,
Son, Neighbour, Citizen, Sufferer, Victim, Martyr: and
in all these and a hundred other descriptions He un
folded His character, severe yet tender, chaste, loving

48 APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.

infinitely wise, and profoundly sympathetic, lofty,
righteous, merciful — a character the influence of which
upon others was the very breath of the Spirit of God,
which awed and allured and purified and kindled men,
claimed and received the homage of their consciences,
stirred and held the affections of their hearts, moved
them to obedience, and by inevitable stages to adora
tion. They knew it was human ; they felt it was
Divine. When He claimed to be, in unique and
sovereign sense, Son of God, they owned and con
fessed the claim to be true. Remember, it is not merely
S. John, but S. Matthew and S. Luke also, who register
His claim. " All things have been delivered unto Me
of My Father : and no one knoweth the Son, save the
Father : neither doth anyone know the Father save the
Son, and He to whomsoever the Son willeth to reveal
Him." The Divine self-revelation in Jesus Christ was
made to the apostles, and, through them, to mankind.
The Divine plan of bringing home that revealed truth
to mankind in and through a religious society was
imparted to and carried into effect by the apostles.
We may marvel, we cannot help marvelling, that the
Divine action should have been so indirect : and our
marvel almost deepens into amazement and darkens
into unbelief, when we trace the actual course of
Christian history, and discover that the Divine society
founded by the apostles has enjoyed, so far as we can
discover, no exemption from the disintegrating and
corrupting influences of time. One circumstance, how
ever, stands between Christianity and its total per
version. The apostles left behind them the materials,

THE NEW TESTAMENT. 49

out of which, either by their own efforts or by the efforts of
their immediate followers, the New Testament has been
fashioned. This is the pre-eminent character of the New
Testament — it is the register of the apostolic testimony.
In the process of forming a canon of Christian Scrip
tures, "the general test which determined the place of a
book in the New Testament was no doubt apostolicity." 1
With a true instinct the early Church fastened on the
apostles as necessarily fulfilling, not merely for their
own time, but for all succeeding ages, a function of the
utmost importance. They spoke to the Church always
in their writings, to which within a few generations was
universally ascribed the character of canonical Scripture.
The Church was "apostolic," the ministry "apostolic,"
the Creed " apostolic," the New Testament " apostolic."
I say this constant emphasis on the apostolic authority
for whatsoever the Church believed and did was dictated
by a true instinct ; for, the more we study Christian
history, the more we are confirmed in this conclusion,
that the apostolic testimony enshrined in the New
Testament has been the principal barrier against
perversion and decay. There the gospel of God's self-
revelation in Jesus Christ has remained on record,
always ready to be appealed to against aberrations of
belief and enormities of practice, a standing menace to
established abuses, a perpetual prophecy of reformation.

The New Testament is the law-book of the Christian

society, and the magna charta of the Christian liberties.

It provides the test of Christian truth ; it enshrines the

palladium of Christian morality. By its aid the Church

1 Vide Sanday : Bampton Lectures, p. 47.

G.U. E

50 APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.

may recover hold of first principles, and discern between
the wholesome development of her system and develop
ments which are not wholesome. When we review the
facts, and recall what the New Testament has been in
the history of Christianity, we have no inclination to
dispute the traditional belief that its authors laboured
under the special protection of the Spirit of Truth. When
we compare the apostolic literature with that of the
immediately succeeding time, with the Christian litera
ture of all subsequent ages, we find ourselves forced to
recognize a superiority so profound as to require a
separate category for its expression, and we no longer
quarrel with the time-honoured declaration that the
apostolic literature is in an unique sense an inspired
thing, a fresh and authentic utterance of the Mind of
Christ.

The exhortations of S. Paul with which I prefaced
my sermon come home to us with direct and cogent
force when, with the New Testament in our hands, we
face the practical questions of our time, and seek to
apply the unchangeable principles of Christianity to the
novel circumstances of the modern world. " So then,
brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye
were taught, whether by word, or by epistle of ours."
That counsel, addressed to the immature converts of
Thessalonica, is taken from one of the earliest of
S. Paul's writings : it is echoed in his latest, when from
his Roman prison he thus admonishes the ripest and
dearest of his disciples : " But abide thou in the things
which thou hast learned and hast been assured of,
knowing of whom thou hast learned them."

THE PRESENT DISTRESS. 51

2 If this be indeed a true application of S. Paul's
words, it remains for me briefly to show what is the
particular service which this habitual reference to and
deference towards the New Testament is capable of
rendering to the modern Church. Our position as
churchmen may, perhaps, be described as one of
paralysed optimism. We were never so confident of
the inherent vitality of Christianity ; we were never so
oppressed by its traditional forms. The great wave
of aggressive materialism which two generations ago
seemed irresistible has apparently spent its force. On
all hands men, even though opposed to the faith of
Christ and intensely hostile to the ecclesiastical system,
yet confess, often with astonishing frankness, the moral
impotence of mere secularism. An eloquent French
writer of our own time speaks with no less truth than
pathos of " the lament which fills our age, the lament of
the orphan, who has no more a heavenly Father to speak
to him and guide him. It runs, he says, from one end of
the century to the other, amid the crash of wars and
revolutions, amid the triumphant cries of science, amid
the sarcasms of egotism and scepticism, amid the ever
lasting tumult of life on its way. . . . See how the
century at its close betakes itself to murmuring words
of faith; goes in quest of a revelation from Ibsen to
Tolstoi, from Buddha to Fiesole; hails in splendid hymns
a vague Deity who pays no heed, and attempts to join
hands in defence of a creed in which it has no faith." l

There is everywhere a return of popular feeling to
religion, or at least to sentiments which are eminently
1 Darmestcter : Les Proph^tes (T Israel, pp. iii., iv.

E 2

52 APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.

favourable to religion. The strength of the religious
reaction may in part be measured by the astonishing
success of various theurgic movements, such as Christian
Science, which (whatever else may be said of them)
disclose to view a vast fund of yearning credulity in the
very centres of our materialised and sceptical civilisation.
In a thousand ways — according to the bent of their
genius or the colour of their experience — men are
striving after the truths which in Christianity are
essential and characteristic. The fact is full of en
couragement, and it inspires in the observant Christian
boundless hopes. He feels that the ultimate gainer
from all this spiritual movement must be the religion of
the Incarnation. S. Augustine's famous confession
seems the cry of civilised humanity, weary to death with
the hollow and arrogant sophistries which too long have
claimed its allegiance : Fecisti nos ad Te, Domine, et
inquictuin est cor nostrum donee requiescat in Te —
" O Lord, Thou hast fashioned us for Thyself, and our
heart has no rest until it rests in Thee."

But when we attempt to make answer, as Christians,
to this appeal of humanity, we seem to be paralysed by
our intolerable systems. It is a startling but certain
fact that the revival of the religious sentiment co-exists
in the same minds with a deep and definite repugnance
to organised Christianity. The general conscience turns
with something like contempt from the churches.
Cardinal Manning somewhere notices with alarm that
at a large public meeting in America the Church was
hissed, while the name of Christ was received with
applause. I have myself heard a great assembly of

RETURN TO CHRIST. 53

self-styled secularists in East London cheer our Saviour
with obvious sincerity. What can it mean ? Why does
the general conscience distinguish so sharply between
current Christianity and its Founder ? What malignant
force is that which compels Christians to be for ever j
alienating gratuitously, wantonly, the very people they
honestly desire to win to the Christian faith ? Consider
the repugnance with which a candid and pious intelligence
discovers that Christian men really care about such
trivialities as those which have been the subjects of
angry controversy during the " Church Crisis." I
confess I am so ashamed that I can hardly face my
countrymen. And yet, though we perceive our own
follies, we seem caught into a vicious circle, and we
cannot escape from them. We are stricken with the
timidity which is born of secret doubt, and for lack of
recognized and authoritative and adequate marks by
which to distinguish truth from error, and the eternal
from the transitory, we are dragged helplessly in the
wake of the fanaticisms we deplore and despise.

Surely the moral of our present humiliations is the
necessity of a return to first principles : we must get
behind the prejudices, interests, errors, associations, of
history, to the Fountain-head of Christianity — we must
sit at the feet of the Master, and move again in the
company of the apostles. We must recover the sense
of religious proportion, and see contemporary questions
in their true perspective. We must become in temper
and spirit, and not merely in name and claim, an
Apostolic Church, and then we may invoke with
confidence that Divine guidance which inspired the

54 APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.

apostles ; then it may be, nay, it must be, that we, too
shall gain that spirit of courageous initiative, of resource,
of enterprise, of originality, which marked the apostolic
age ; then we in our turn shall display the tenacious
loyalty to the mind of Christ which chastened and
coloured the Apostolic Church. Then, and not till then,
may we put our hands to the great and difficult task for
which Christendom is waiting — the task of bringing the
mingled mass of traditional Christianity under the
searching and effective criticism of the New Testament,
cutting away the ample growths of time, and the vile
parasitic plants of mundane interest, and so releasing
for new and greater developments that Tree of Life
whose roots are watered by the river of God, and " whose
leaves are for the healing of the nations."

APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY.— I.

THE PENTECOSTAL GIFT.

Preached on the $th Sunday after Trinity (/uly 7///, 1901), in
S. Margaret s, Westminster.

AND WHEN THE DAY OF PKNTECOST WAS NOW COME, THEY WERE
ALL TOGETHER IN ONE PLACE. AND SUDDENLY THERE CAME FROM
HEAVEN A SOUND AS OF THE RUSHING OF A MIGHTY WIND, AND
IT HILLED ALL THE HOUSE WHERE THEY WERE SITTING. AND
THERE APPEARED UNTO THEM TONGUES PARTING ASUNDER LIKE
AS OF FIRE : AND IT SAT UPON EACH OF THEM. AND THEY WERE
ALL FILLED WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT, AND BEGAN TO SPEAK
WITH OTHER TONGUES, AS THE SPIRIT GAVE THEM UTTERANCE. —

Acts ii. 14.

FEW questions have been more hotly debated, and
few are of greater intrinsic difficulty, than the precise
historical value of the first twelve chapters of the Acts.
It is almost universally agreed that the later portion of
the book, in which the missionary journeys of S. Paul
are described, is of the highest quality of evidence. The
author was largely an eye-witness of the events which
he recorded, and as to the speeches of the apostle, if
we cannot positively affirm their authenticity in view
of the established literary fashion of the time, yet all must

56 THE PENTECOSTAL GIFT.

allow that they are thoroughly Pauline in character, and
that the author was well-placed for transcribing the
actual words of the apostle, if he wished to do so. But
the first twelve chapters admittedly stand on another
footing. The author of the Acts could not have had
personal knowledge of the facts, and there are hardly
any means of determining with certainty the actual
sources of his information. It would seem, perhaps,
most probable that he included among his authorities
one or more written statements. If we are right, as I
have little doubt that we are, in accepting the unanimous
testimony of the Church from the second century on
wards as to the authorship of the book, then it is easy
to perceive very satisfactory sources from which S. Luke
might have gathered materials both for "the former
treatise," which recorded the history of Jesus Christ, and
the later work, which narrated the acts of S. Peter and
S. Paul. He was the companion and intimate friend
of S. Paul himself. He is known to have been acquainted
with the deacon and evangelist Philip, and to have been
associated with S. Mark, S. Peter's "interpreter," in
the last years of S. Paul's life. He was, thus, familiar
with the inner circle of the Apostolic Church, and in
a position to learn all that was to be learned about the
origins of Christianity. You will not expect me to
discuss further the general question of the authorship
of the Acts, but obviously I could not enter on my
subject without some preliminary statement as to the
document which I had chosen as the basis of my
preaching.

The narrative of the Day of Pentecost presents a

THE DAY OF PENTECOST. 57

curious literary problem. It cannot be regarded as,
in the full sense, historical, for reasons which I shall
state immediately, but it certainly is something more
than a free creation of pious fancy, or the artificial
product of ecclesiastical policy. Even those scholars
who take the most unfavourable view of the narrative
yet recognize the sermon of S. Peter as evidently primi
tive. It is no doubt the case that they are influenced
in their attitude by the notion that the simple Christology
of that sermon can be used as a weapon against the
traditional belief of the Church ; but, however that may
be, their concession is notable, and goes far to discount
their unfavourable verdict on the narrative as a whole.
I conceive the truth to lie midway between the extreme
positions. We cannot suppose that within a few weeks
of the Crucifixion the disciples were openly established
in Jerusalem as a numerous, increasing, and popular
community, preaching with the utmost publicity and in
the very Temple courts the messiahship and resurrec
tion of One whom the united powers of Church and
State had condemned, and with extremest circumstances
of public ignominy executed.

I agree with Weizsacker that such an origin of
Christianity is " historically impossible." I agree with
him that the first stages of Christian history in
Jerusalem, as everywhere else, were passed in obscurity,
that the Gospel was first whispered in the ear before it
was proclaimed on the housetops, that the Church in the
capital, as in the great cities of the empire, grew out
of households converted one by one, and ultimately
federating into an ordered society. 1 agree that the

58 THE PENTECOSTAL GIFT.

whole form and spirit of the narrative compel us to
regard it as a highly artificial composition, belonging
moreover to a type with which the Jews were very
familiar, and which, beyond all question, the early
Christians largely adopted. It is a symbolic narrative —
that is, a record of fact expressed in symbols designed
to bring out its deep and permanent significance. The
Old Testament, which both directly and indirectly
affected early Christian literature to an extent which
hardly admits of exaggeration, contains many such
narratives. The Christian prophet, whose account of
that memorable Pentecost formed the basis of S. Luke's
record, followed the most venerated precedents. The
Divine epiphanies to ancient Israel had been so
described. Thus Jehovah is represented as appearing
to Moses in a burning bush ; on Sinai He discloses His
presence by eloquent tokens, smoke and fire, earthquake,
and the voice of the trumpet waxing louder and louder ;
on Horeb, to the fugitive and disheartened Elijah, His
approach is in like manner heralded by wind, earth
quake and fire ; to Ezekiel in exile by the River Chebar
the same awful authentications are related to have
accompanied the manifestation of the Divine. It is
certain that this symbolic writing was a recognized and
almost inevitable literary mode among the Jews. We
are safe in assuming that it was the characteristic mode
in which the Christian prophet expressed his revela
tions, and we may regard the Apocalypse as a pre
eminent but thoroughly typical example of Christian
prophecy in the apostolic age.

In studying the New Testament, then, we must keep

VALUE OF CRITICISM. 59

a middle way between the opposite perils of an irrational
literalism, on the one hand, and a not less irrational
scepticism on the other. Symbolic imagery is not
historic fact, but it is the vehicle and interpreter of
historic fact. Our business as students is to disentangle
the truth from literary expressions, which are now
properly obsolete, and which, therefore, obscure rather
than convey it. Our interest as religious men is to
recognize and appropriate the disentangled truth. It
is, then, in the service of religion that an honest criti
cism necessarily works. The recovery of truth, even
though it be conditioned by the sacrifice of much tradi
tion, which has built itself into literature and art, is
ultimately ministerial to spiritual advance, and no
clamour seems to me more irrational and irreligious
than that which fanaticism never fails to raise against
the criticism of current tradition.

I have thought it necessary to make these preliminary
observations for two reasons. In the first place, it
seemed to me clearly futile to invite you to consider
this passage of Scripture without indicating in advance
the authority which in our discussion we should
attribute to it ; and, in the next place, it seemed to
me unworthy of the mutual confidence which, I hope
I may always assume, exists between us that I should
withhold the view which on this subject I have been
led to adopt. We may now address ourselves to our
proper task. What was the gift which the Apostolic
Church received at Pentecost ? What must we infer
from the symbolic narrative of S. Luke to have really
happened ? I must begin by asking you to dismiss

6o THE PENTECOSTAL GIFT.

from your minds the common notion that the Pentecostal
gift was, in the phrase of the Prayer Book, "the gift
of divers languages." No doubt the narrative as it
stands declares the contrary : but then, as I have
pointed out, the narrative as it stands is not historical.
We are, happily, not without the means for discovering
the fact which underlies the record. If you turn to
the fourteenth chapter of S. Paul's first Epistle to the
Corinthians, you will find a detailed description of an
extraordinary phenomenon which it is impossible not
to identify with that "speaking in other tongues" which
is described in the narrative before us. Let me remind
you that on every sound principle of criticism the first
Epistle to the Corinthians is a better authority than
the second chapter of the Acts. It is earlier in point
of time ; its authorship is undisputed ; its evidence is
at first hand ; it is free from any suspicion of tendency
or purpose. We are bound to make it our key for the
interpretation of the later document. What, then, is
the testimony of S. Paul in the Epistle to the Corinthians
as to this mysterious spiritual gift ?

Putting together the indications there provided, we
learn that the charisma, or gift of " the tongue," was
always unintelligible to the hearers unless they possessed
the power — itself a charisma — of interpretation ; that,
therefore, its value as an element in the public worship
of the Church was entirely contingent on the presence
of an interpreter ; that, though generally useless for
the purpose of general edification, it cclified the speaker
himself, in spite of the fact that the speaker might
himself be ignorant of the meaning of the words which

THE GIFT AT CORINTH. 6r

rushed from his lips; that this gift, both as unintelligible
and, probibly, as accompanied by violent physical
excitement, was not calculated to make a favourable
impression on casu.il observers, who might easily
mistake it for insanity ; finally, that in spite of its
mysterious and even violent character, it was not really
outside the control of the individual. S. Paul, though
he thus takes a very unfavourable view of the practical
worth of the charisma in question, did most certainly
rnld it to be a genuine, and, for its own purposes, a
precious, gift of the Holy Spirit. He himself was
richly endowed. " I thank God," he says, " I speak
with tongues more than you all." It is surety quite
evident that there is no question here of a miraculous
knowledge of languages. There is no reason to think
that S. Paul had knowledge of any other languages
than those which he had learned at home in Tarsus
and in the schools of Jerusalem. Indeed, the style
of the sacred writers makes it sufficiently evident that
they had acquired their Greek, for they often write it
inaccurately, and not rarely force into it their native
Hebrew idioms.

The subsequent references to the gift of tongues in
the Book of the Acts are in agreement with the Pauline
epistles. It is not seriously suggested that when
Cornelius and his friends received the Holy Ghost and
began to speak with tongues, they were suddenly breaking
out in various and hitherto unknown languages. It is
particularly worthy of notice that S. Peter, in relating
this occurrence to the Church in Jerusalem, expressly
identified the charisma of Cornelius with that of

62 THE PENTECOSTAL GIFT.

Pentecost. "As I began to speak, the Holy Ghost
fell on them, even as on us at the beginning." Similarly
in the case of the twelve disciples of S. John the
Baptist, whom S. Paul found at Ephesus and whom
he baptized. No one supposes that they spoke foreign
languages when, after the laying on of the Apostle's
hands, " the Holy Ghost came on them, and they spake
with tongues and prophesied." Moreover, when closely
examined, the record of the Acts is hardly compatible
with the assumption, which, perhaps, S. Luke himself
makes, that the " tongues " were divers languages.

The unusual and impressive word, (nro<t>0fyy«r6ai which
in the mouth of a Greek of that age might almost be
called technical hardly suggests the common view.
The Greeks described as a7ro</>0e'-y para the short, pointed
sayings, often profound, sometimes luminous, always
characteristic, of their sages, and a younger contemporary
of S. Luke, Plutarch, within a few years of the
composition of the Acts, collected a great number of
such dicta, and dedicated it to the Emperor Trajan.
So S. Chrysostom points out that the quality of the
inspired utterance is indicated in the text a-n-o^OfyfjMTa yap
rjv TO. trap avrwv Aeyo/Aci/a — " For the things spoken by
them were profound sayings as of philosophers." The
translators of the Septuagint had used this word in
a kindred and even more suggestive sense. It signified
the solemn, oracular utterance of the diviner, the
soothsayer, and the Temple psalmist. The use of a
word thus heavily charged with special significance
as well for Greek as for Greek-speaking Jew cannot,
in so careful a writer as S. Luke, be accidental : it

EVIDENCE OF THE ACTS. 63

carries on its surface the warning that we are to
recognize the special character of the inspired utterance
rather in its spiritual quality than in its linguistic form.
It is one of several indications which, even in this
narrative, warn us off from that literal understanding
which seems so obvious, and yet, when examined, is
found so impossible.

Thus, the observation of the scoffers, " They are filled
with new wine," does n3t seem very relevant to a
preaching of which the chief distinction was that it
was expressed, contrary to their expectation, in their
respective mother-tongues. S. Peter's defence is hardly
what we should expect if the phenomenon which he had
to justify was a supernatural knowledge of foreign
languages. The prophecy of Joel, which he quotes,
has no reference to anything at once so amazing and
so commonplace, while it is very relevant indeed to
such manifestations of the Divine influence as those
which were common among the Corinthians. If a
knowledge of languages was supernaturally conveyed,
it must have been designed to facilitate the missionary
labours of the Church, although the wide diffusion of
Greek rendered such knowledge little requisite for
those who, as the Apostles, preached mainly, if not
solely, within the Graeco-Roman sphere. It is, however,
impossible to produce a single instance that any such
supernatural knowlege was ever exhibited. The narra
tive of the apostolic preaching at Lystra clearly
indicates that S. Paul and S. Barnabas were ignorant
of "the speech of Lycaonia," and only learned by
degrees the idolatrous intentions of the people. It was

64 THE PENTECOSTAL GIFT.

a matter of astonishment to the chief captain that
S. Paul coiTd speak Greek, which would hardly have
been the case if the knowledge of languages had
been a characteristic of the Christians.1

I have laboured this point at such length because,
until it has been established, I cannot usefully proceed.
The salutary influence which the New Testament ought
to have on the modern Church is weakened, and
in some directions destroyed, by the assumption —
not, perhaps, unnatural in itself, but, none the less,
most unfortunate in its effect — that the Apostolic
Church, from which the New Testament proceeded,
and of which the life is there reflected, had its
being in an atmosphere of the miraculous, which in
these prosaic days no longer exists. Only when
Apostolic Christianity is recognized as normal can
its precedents be accepted as guides of our action :
and this must be my apology for holding you to
considerations which might almost be described as
technical, and which, I fear, must have been wearisome.
However, by facing these now, we free ourselves from
the necessity of doing so in the future.

The Pentecostal gift — I pray you to believe — was no
transitory marvel, the decoration of the first age and the
despair of every other, but the abiding possession of the
Christian Church, in which every generation of believers
has part and lot. These words remain true after the
lapse of so many ages, true of every living branch of
the Vine of God, true in due measure of every genuine

1 N.B. — Much of this is quoted from my book, Afostclic
Christianity, p. 2 1 5 ff.

THE ABIDING SIGNS OF PENTECOST. 65

disciple — " They were all filled with the Holy Ghost,
and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit
gave them utterance." The essential purpose of the
sacred history is the assertion of the fact, which lies on
the surface of the apostolic epistles, that Christianity
has enriched human life with moral forces previously
unknown, that these forces are at the disposal of disciples,
that apart from them Christianity is an empty name.
A power, not of this world, came upon the disciples,
transforming their characters, mastering their wills,
unlocking the scaled fountains of their affections, drawing
into play the latent resources of their intellects, equip
ping them, in fact, as all the world acknowledges, to be
the evangelists of human society. That power was the
very Spirit of God, brought by the grace of the Incarna
tion into contact — conscious, intimate, perpetual — with
the surrendered spirit of man ; and that power, however
His advent may have been accompanied then, as often
since, by transitory physical phenomena, was and is
essentially moral, and operative in the moral sphere.

We must seek the tokens of Pentecost still in the "fire"
of Christian zeal, and the mysterious "breath" of spiritual
life, and the intelligible "utterance" of religious witness.
The miracle has never failed. Silent, simple folk have,
under the power of the Holy Ghost, become eloquent
heralds of eternal truth. No stratum of society has
been too low, no conditions of life have been too difficult,
no human material has been too obdurate for this wonder
to reveal itself. The power of the Gospel is confessed
in the cry of the multitude, as it hears the various yet
accordant testimony of the inspired disciples. " Behold,

G.U. F

66 THE PENTECOSTAL GIFT.

are not all these which speak Galileans ? And how hear
we, every man in our own language wherein we were
born ? . . . we do hear them speaking in our tongues
the mighty works of God." The vehement emotions
of the first days did not, and could not, continue. They
had no intrinsic and abiding value, and even while they
thrilled the Church the inspired wisdom of the apostles
bade men not put their trust in them. But " the fruits
of the Spirit" remain, and we may still venerate in the
Christian character the direct and distinctive creation of
the Holy Ghost. In such days as these, when in so
many directions men are seeking for physical demon
strations of spiritual forces, it is well to remember that
in that first age, when, if ever, it was permissible to
expect such signs, the apostles held another language
altogether, and pointed always to the moral sphere as
that within which we must track the footsteps of God.
" The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering,
kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, temperance :
against such there is no law."

APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY.— II.

APOSTOLIC PREACHING.

Preached on the 6/// Sunday after Trinity, July i4///, 1901, in
S. Margaret' 'j, Westminster.

BUT PETER, STANDING UP WITH THE ELEVEN, LIFTED UP HIS
VOICE, AND SPAKE FORTH UNTO THEM, SAYING, YE MEN OF JUD.EA,
AND ALL YE THAT DWELL AT JERUSALEM, BE THIS KNOWN UNTO
YOU, AND GIVE EAR UNTO MY WORDS. — Acts \\. 14.

IT is allowed on all hands that the speeches attributed
in the Acts to S. Peter give a faithful version of the
earliest Christian preaching. It is, therefore, happily,
not necessary for me to inflict upon you any argument
on this point. For our present purpose it makes no
difference what view we take as to the nature of those
speeches. Whether we hold that they are actual reports
of the Apostle's preaching, or that they were composi
tions of the historian following the established literary
fashion of his age, our interest in them is unaffected.
They remain, in either case, authentic examples of that
primitive Gospel which was proclaimed by the men
who had "known Christ after the flesh," and it is in that

F 2

68 APOSTOLIC PREACHING.

character that they possess abiding importance. At the
beginning of my sermon it may be well to ask what is
the advantage to us of studying that primitive Gospel.
The Christian message has developed under the influence
of history. As it was brought to the audience of new
races, and proclaimed under novel conditions of social
and political organisation, it necessarily changed its
form. The questions which agitated the Greek mind
were very different from those which moved Jews, and
in later times, Celts and Teutons. The gospel of the
Divine revelation had to prove its character by its
competence to deal with all the problems which haunt
and harass human life. Thus, by an inevitable process,
Christianity developed into forms which were unknown
in the apostolic age ; and, in point of fact, the Christian
message, as it reaches us, includes elements drawn from
many sources and built into it by many hands through
many ages. We could not reasonably resent this, we
cannot certainly go back on it ; but one thing we ought
most anxiously to insist upon, as the only sufficient
security against the worst perversions : I mean, the
preservation in their original prominence of the essential
features of the primitive message. The apostolic
preaching must remain the standard of Christian witness
as long as the world shall last.

Now all preaching, as well that of the apostles as any
other, has a form which is temporary, and a substance
which, if it be true preaching, is eternal. There is, to
use a familiar expression which many of you will
recognize, "the kernel and the husk" in religion, and
it is a matter of the utmost consequence that these should

THE KERNEL AND THE HUSK. 69

not be confounded, that the essential worth and perpetual
obligation of the kernel should not be attributed to the
husk, and that, conversely, the limited and anachronistic
character which, of necessity, attaches to the husk of
religious teaching, should not endanger by association
the paramount authority and unfailing worth of the
kernel.

We are, then, obviously compelled to examine the
record of apostolic preaching with this important purpose
in view, — the just and accurate discrimination between
its transitory and its abiding elements.

Now, the most superficial study of S. Peter's sermon
on the day of Pentecost — and we must remember that it
is in these respects thoroughly typical of all the recorded
preaching of the apostle — discovers three characteristic
notes, which are strictly secular and personal, and, there
fore, do not, and, from the nature of the case, could not
retain their force. There is, first, the appeal to
experience, to knowledge of the facts about Christ.
We cannot appreciate, even with the Gospels in our
hands, the force of such an appeal as this : — " Ye men of
Israel, hear these words : Jesus of Nazareth, a man
approved of God unto you by mighty works and wonders
and signs, which God did by Him in the midst of you,
even as ye yourselves know." However private and
even furtive the apostolic preaching must at first have
been, however few in number and humble in quality were
the first hearers whom the Christian message attracted,
we cannot doubt that this direct appeal to the actual
facts certified by personal knowledge was a principal and
effective part of the appeal. The ministry of our Lord

70 APOSTOLIC PREACHING.

had been carried on mainly among the poor, and for a
great part of it, He had been regarded by them with
confidence, gratitude, and admiration. His lamentable
end must have stricken multitudes of humble folk with
shame and dismay. It is with melancholy amazement
that the modern Christian marks the sudden and complete
desertion of One who for three years had been the
benefactor of the poor. Even at this distance of time
we feel the disgrace of that unparalleled baseness. It is
not unworthy of notice that when the Christians of the
second and following centuries began to dwell on the
evangelic history, and to re-write it in accordance with
their own notions of what was fitting, they tried to
mitigate the shock to our moral nature by imagining a
whole series of testimonies on behalf of Christ offered
to Pilate by those whom Christ had benefited. The
palsied, blind, crippled, leprous arc described as inter
rupting the legal procedure by their stories of Christ's
benevolence and power.1 This amiable fiction, I need
not remind you, has no shadow of foundation ; but it
illustrates sentiments which were powerful in the age
which produced the apocryphal gospels, and which
cannot have been absent from that earlier age, on which
lay the recent shadow of the great crime. The appeal
of the apostles was equally obvious and effective. Their
message could find an entrance through the gate of
remorse. But this manifestly was an advantage which
was limited in time to the generation which had known
Christ as a contemporary, and in place to the actual

1 See, for example, "The Gospel of Nicodemus " in Cowpcr's
Apoc. Gospels, p. 243.

APOSTOLIC USE OF PROPHECY. 71

scenes of His ministry. Plainly, then, the appeal to
personal knowledge belongs to the perishable husk of
the apostolic preaching.

In the next place, we notice the large quotations from
the Old Testament, and the constant applications of
prophecy to the facts of Christ's life ; and this, also, I
apprehend, belongs in part, if not altogether, to the
transitory elements of apostolic preaching. We know
that the apostles preached in an age marked by the
most ardent messianic expectation : they shared to the
full the eager hopes of their contemporaries, but with
this difference, that they fastened their hopes on the
Lord Jesus as the Messiah. This conviction provided
them with a key to the prophecies ; they read them
henceforward in connection with their own experiences ;
they discovered in a thousand details of their Master's
life fulfilments of prediction ; and in their hands the
argument from prophecy was elaborated and became
the favourite and most effectual type of Christian
apologetic. We know, further, that the apostles in all
matters of education were men of their age : they
shared its beliefs, they endorsed its ideals, they held
its prejudices. This was the platform from which
they started ; and their Christian belief had to find the
best expression it could within the grooves of ancestral
Judaism.

Now, it is certainly the case that the doctrine as to
prophecy and its applications which the apostles received
from the rabbinic schools, is no longer held by thought
ful Christians, and, therefore, the arguments which they
built on fulfilments of prophecy can no longer be

72 APOSTOLIC PREACHING.

effectively used for the defence of the faith. We have
an excellent example in S. Peter's sermon. He quotes
at length from the Prophet Joel, and from the Book of
Psalms. Can his use of those passages be justified to
the modern Christian ? And is the argument he bases
on them still valid ? If you turn to the Book of Joel
and read the prophecy quoted by S. Peter in its true
connexion, you will hardly think that the prophet could
have himself imagined such a fulfilment as that affirmed
by the apostle. He is concerned, after the common
prophetic fashion, in pointing the moral of actual occur
rences. The land is nearly ruined by a plague of locusts,
and he interprets the calamity, which he describes in
the language of Oriental hyperbole, as the judgment of
God, only to be averted by national repentance. Then
he describss the effect of such repentance. Jehovah,
reconciled to His people, pours blessings upon them.
Material prosperity and religious revival proceed hand
in hand. This happy interval is preliminary to " the
great and terrible day of the Lord," in which all the
national enemies of Israel shall be finally overthrown
with great slaughter. It is difficult to recognize in a
prophecy, inspired by the narrowest patriotism, the
prediction of that gift of the Eternal Spirit freely to
all believers, which should finally invalidate and dis
allow the religious exclusiveness of the Jews. If we
may turn aside from the natural and primary sense of
the prophecy, and permit ourselves to read into it
meanings nobler than the prophet knew, we can certainly
perceive an interesting and suggestive connection
between his vision and the facts to which S. Peter

USE OF THE PSALMS. 73

, but it is equally certain that we can build no
argument on that basis.

The case is similar with the quotations from the
Psalms, and the arguments based on them. S. Peter
undoubtedly believed that David was the author of the
Psalms : it is none the less notorious that scholars now
agree that few, if an}', of the Psalms can be the work of
the " sweet singer of Israel." 1 The words of the
Apostle, then, have largely lost their relevancy, since
the assumptions they imply are no longer to be counted
upon in modern hearers of the Christian message : —
" Brethren, I may say unto you freely of the patriarch
David, that he both died and was buried, and his tomb
is with us unto this day. Being therefore a prophet, and
knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that
of the fruit of his loins He would set one upon his
throne ; he foreseeing this spake of the resurrection of
the Christ, that neither was He left in Hades, nor did
His flesh see corruption." I can conceive few more
effective arguments when addressed to the Jews of the
first century ; I see little force in it as addressed to the
English of the twentieth.

Once more, the student of S. Peter's sermons will
observe their obviously Jewish colour. He speaks as a
Jew to Jews, and the fact shapes his language. There
is no trace of any wider conception of the Church than

1 See G. A. Smith, Modern Criticism and the Preaching of the Old
Testament, p. #6. "While the King's fame as the father of sacred
minstrelsy appears inexplicable unless he actually composed some
hymn^, yet recent criticism has tended to confirm the impos
sibility of proving any given psalm in our Psalter to have been by

74 APOSTOLIC PREACHING.

that of a reformed and glorified nation in this Pentecostal
sermon. The various foreigners, to whom the sermon
is spoken, are described as " Jews, devout men from
every nation under heaven," i.e., plainly the Jews of the
Dispersion and the circumcised proselytes who had
joined the synagogues. There is no mention of Gentiles.
The sermon itself is, throughout, addressed to Jews.
We have, then, to make an effort to get behind this
Judaic form and limited reference in order to reach the
Christian truth it at once conceals and delivers.

These aspects and elements of the apostolic preaching
form what I have called its perishable husk. We must
distinguish and separate them in order to discover that
kernel of immortal truth, which alone merits our accept
ance, and which, I affirm again, it concerns us most
urgently to hold fast.

Very briefly, then, for I must not, even in the interest
of this great theme, violate the accustomed limits of
my discourse, let us inquire what are the abiding
elements of the apostolic preaching. What do the
apostles set forward as the essential truths of the
Christian revelation ? Supposing the relative import
ance of Christian beliefs stood now where it stood then,
what would be the aspect of Christianity ? I find the
answer to these questions sufficiently indicated in the
concluding verses of the recorded sermon : — " This
Jesus did God raise up, whereof we all are witnesses.
Being therefore by the right hand of God exalted, and
having received of the Father the promise of the Holy
Ghost, He hath poured forth this, which ye see and
hear. . . . Let all the house of Israel therefore know

KMPHASIS ON HISTORIC FACTS. 75

assuredly, that God hath made Him both Lord and
Christ, this Jesus whom ye crucified."

You mark the firm and reiterated insistence on the
historic facts. With solemn emphasis, as strange, when
we consider it, as it is suggestive, the apostles point
again and again to the crucifixion. What S. Paul
afterwards said of himself holds true of the older
apostles. " They determined to know nothing but Jesus
Christ and Him crucified." They saw the cross through
the resurrection : and as they proclaimed the latter,
they found themselves forced back on the former. It
is, indeed, no mean evidence of the truth of the evangelic
history that they thus exalted and pressed on their
hearers a fact so unpalatable and so appalling. "Jews
ask for signs, and Greeks seek after wisdom, but we
preach Christ crucified, unto Jews a stumblingblock,
and unto Gentiles foolishness."

You note, again, that the resurrection of the Crucified
is authenticated by a two-fold witness. " We all are
witnesses," they say ; but they do not stop there. They
point to another testimony, which was intrinsically
higher, and which admitted of tests which human
evidence necessarily escapes. " He hath poured forth
this, which ye see and hear." The manifest activity of
the Holy Ghost, operative in the moral sphere, was a
fact, which challenged examination, which compelled
notice. S. Peter, at a later stage in his life, developed
this argument from moral consequences. Hy it the
calumniator must be silenced, and the objector answered.
"Wherein they speak against you as evil-doers, they
may by your good works, which they behold, glorify

76 APOSTOLIC PREACHING.

God in the day of visitation." It lay in the nature of
things that the evidence of eye-witnesses to the resur
rection, as to any other fact, though in special degree in
the case of a fact so stupendous and extraordinary,
would become less and less convincing as all means of
testing and checking it passed away. Let us frankly
admit it : no human testimony certified in literature
from so remote a past could sustain, of itself, so vast a
fabric as that of the Christian creed. It is irrational
and shortsighted to even appear to hold the contrary ;
but then, human testimony, even at its best, is not the
sole or the principal foundation of our belief. The
moral evidence of the resurrection cannot be weakened
by lapse of time or change of circumstances ; and it is
deeply suggestive that from the very beginning it was
insisted upon.

Finally, you will notice that in the apostolic preach
ing the person and work of Christ are paramount. "It
is hardly possible not to believe," observes Schmiedel,
"that this Christology of the speeches of Peter must
have come from a primitive source." Here, at least,
then, by the confession of our opponents, we have the
original doctrine about Jesus Christ, which apostles
taught before the subtleties of Gnostic speculation and
Platonic philosophy had coloured and expanded their
simple creed. Very well then : what is the Christology
of the speeches ? Let me put together, without com
ment, the very words of the apostle. Christ, we read
is " the Servant of God," whom God " has glorified," and
"raised from the dead": lie has "poured forth" the
Holy Ghost : He is the "Lord1' of the ancient prophets;

S. PETER'S CHRISTOLOGY. 77

" the Holy and Righteous One," the " Prince or Author of
Life," the "Christ" of God ; "the prophet like unto," but
greater than, Moses: God has " exalted Him with His
right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give
repentance to Israel and remission of sins " : He is
"Lord of all," "ordained of God to be the Judge of
quick and dead," to Whom " all the prophets witness."
These are the expressions used in S. Peter's recorded
speeches ; and I ask, what is the doctrine about Christ
which they imply ? Remember that the apostle was
not drafting a creed, but preaching a sermon. You
must supply a background to the solemn phrases which
he applies to the Master, with Whom he had companied
during three years, and Whom he had thrice denied.
Admit, if you will, that he did not realize all the logical
contents of the faith ho professed, that his Christology
sprang from his heart and conscience rather than from
his intellect, that he owned a truth which he did not
fully grasp, and still you come back to this that the
whole Niccne doctrine is implicit in his teaching. ^
Believe that doctrine, or reject it, as you will, but do not
deceive yourself into thinking that in essence it was an
afterthought — a product of controversies in later times.
Realize the fact, which lies on the surface of the
apostolic literature, that the supreme position, the
Divine dignity, the final moral authority attributed to
Christ by the Church, are original and essential elements
of Christianity, however much the language of dogmatic
definition may have changed in the course of ages.

And is it not noteworthy that the apostle unites so
naturally and easily in his preaching the Three Divine

78 APOSTOLIC PREACHING.

Persons of the later creeds — Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost — realized in their several distinctive action in the
work of redemption, though not yet, for many genera
tions, included in the formal definition of Christian
theology ? We hear much in some quarters of a
Christianity which can dispense with theology : is it not
well to remember that such a Christianity was not that
of the apostles ? And when we have securely rooted
the dogmatic principle in the apostolic age, is it not
well to grasp the essential character of that primitive
creed ? May we once more simplify the statement of
essential belief into that cardinal confession, " God hath
made Him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom ye
crucified " ? And, as we lift from the Church the vast
accumulation of dogmatic definitions, which now over
lays the primitive creed, and, with firm and reverent
effort, seek to set out the ancient apostolic conviction
in language, coined in the mint of contemporary thought,
which shall declare intelligibly to the men of our own
day the everlasting Gospel of Christ, may we not
recover together with the doctrinal simplicity of the
apostles, their wide charity, and agree with S. Paul in
the fraternal salutation, " Grace be with all them that
love our Lord Jesus Christ in uncorruptness " ?

APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY.— III.

BAPTISM.

Preached on the 1th Sunday after Trinity, July 2 is/, 1901,
/';/ S. AfargarefS) Westminster.

NOW WHEN THEY HEARD THIS, THEY WERE PRICKED IN THEIR
HEART, AND SAID UNTO PETER AND THE REST OF THE APOSTLES,
BRETHREN, WHAT SHALL WE DO ? AND PETER SAID UNTO THEM,
REPENT YE, AND BE BAPTIZED EVERY ONE OF YOU IN THE NAME OF
JESUS CHRIST UNTO THE REMISSION OF YOUR SINS J AND YE SHALL
RECEIVE THE GIFT OF THE HOLY GHOST. FOR TO YOU IS THE
PROMISE, AND TO YOUR CHILDREN, AND TO ALL THAT ARE AFAR
OFF, EVEN AS MANY AS THE LORD OUR GOD SHALL CALL UNTO HIM.
AND WITH MANY OTHER WORDS HE TESTIFIED AND EXHORTED THEM,
SAYING, SAVE YOURSELVES FROM THIS CROOKED GENERATION. THEY
THEN THAT RECEIVED HIS WORD WERE BAPTIZED: AND THERE
WERE ADDED UNTO THEM IN THAT DAY ABOUT THREE THOUSAND

SOULS. — Acts ii. 37-41.

AN American divine in a recently published book on
"Christian Institutions" has stated both truly and
impressively the unique importance of the two sacra
ments. "If," he says, "we could imagine that the
Christian Church, in the course of distant ages, should
vanish from the earth as ancient heathen religions have

8o BAPTISM.

done, and some inquirer should try to interpret its secret
by reading its remains, it would not be its creeds or con
fessions, its organisation, its architecture, or its ritual
that would best reveal the secret of its life, for these have
varied with the moods and exigencies of the hour ; but
its two sacraments, which are not dependent upon human
speech for their significance, which appropriate the
physical elements of external nature as the most forcible
expositions of the Christian idea ; the water standing for
purification, the bread and the wine for the sustenance
of life ; humanity purifying itself in order to sit down at
the banquet of the Eternal." l

It is not less true that on its sacramental side
Christianity enters most closely into the common
religious conception of mankind. The silent eloquence
of sacramental symbolism has always spoken to the
devout audience of men, and all religions have a sacra
mental aspect. We are concerned this morning with
the apostolic practice and doctrine of the sacrament of
baptism. It is important to keep in mind that we are
certainly dealing with an original element of Christianity.
We must ascend the stream of ecclesiastical history t«>
its source before we can reach the origin of the two
sacraments. Even those relentless scholars, such as
Harnack, who — in the teeth of the evidence of all the
textual authorities we possess — will not allow that the
famous commission at the end of S. Matthew's Gospel
is a saying of Christ, and who insist that "it is possible
only with the help of tradition to trace back to J-.-sus a
' sacrament of baptism,' "yet concede lhat " it is credible
1 Allen, Llnistian Institutions, p.

PR^E-CHRISTIAN BAPTISM.

that tradition is accurate here," that " Paul knows of no
other way of receiving the Gentiles into the Christian
communities than by baptism," and that "it is highly
probable that in the time of Paul all Jewish Christians
were also baptized." l

I shall not waste your time in arguing a point, upon
which only the habit and exigency of an extreme scep
ticism can throw the shadow of doubt, but I shall rather
inquire into the nature of the Christian sacrament. Our
Divine Master seems to have followed the method of
using, as far as possible, the existing religious materials,
which, so to speak, He found ready to His hand ; and
the enormous importance of an accurate and thorough
knowledge of contemporary conditions, both Jewish and
pagan, but especially Jewish, arises from this fact.
Behind Christian doctrines, institutions, usages, lie the
assumptions of previously existing systems ; and until
these have been justly appraised, we are not in a position
to estimate the amount of new truth infused into them
by Christianity. What, then, did our Saviour find ready
to His Hand, which He fashioned into the Sacrament
of Baptism ? Two forms of baptism were then existing
and familiar — the baptism of proselytes on their admis
sion to the Jewish Communion, and the " baptism of
repentance " administered by S. John the Baptist as a
public symbolic declaration of moral change. The
latter stands admittedly in direct historical relation with
the Christian sacrament, but the former, though it had
reference only to ceremonial defilement, yet had certain
features which were curiously parallel to the Christian
1 Ilarnack, History of Dogma, vol. i. p. 79, note.

G.U. G

82 BAPTISM.

practice, and did certainly prepare the minds of the
people for the doctrine of baptismal regeneration.

No words of comment are needed in order to point
out the Christian aspect of the following description of
the Jewish baptism, which I take from Dr. Edersheim's
learned and interesting note on the subject : —

"The waters of baptism were to [the proselyte] in
very truth, though in a far different from the Christian
sense, the ' bath of regeneration." As he stepped out of
these waters he was considered as ' born anew ' — in the
language of the Rabbis, as if he were 'a little child just
born,' as ' a child of one day.' But this new birth was
not 'a birth from above' in the sense of moral or
spiritual renovation, but only as implying a new
relationship to God, to Israel, and to his own past,
present, and future. It was expressly enjoined that all
the difficulties of his new citizenship should first be set
before him, and if, after that, he took upon himself the
yoke of the law, he should be told how all those
sorrows and persecutions were intended to convey a
greater blessing, and all those commandments to
redound to greater merit. More especially was he to
regard himself as a new man in reference to his past.
Country, home, habits, friends, and relations were all
changed. The past, with all that belonged to it, was
past, and he was a new man — the old, with its defile
ments, was buried in the waters of baptism." l

This was the baptism exacted from Gentiles in order
to purge away their ceremonial uncleanness. Christ
adopted it as a sacrament of moral cleansing, necessary
1 Vide Edersheim, Jesus the Messiah, vol. ii. p. 746.

THE BAPTISM OF JOHN. 83

in the case of all, Jews not less than Gentiles, who
would enter "the kingdom of God." The startling
innovation in quality and range comes into view when
the apostle bids his own countrymen " repent, and be
baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ unto the remission
of sins."

The " baptism of John " in two respects was directly
related to the Christian sacrament which superseded it.
It also was directed to moral, not ceremonial defilement;
and it also was administered to Jews. Those who
received that baptism did so as penitents. " They were
baptized in the river Jordan, confessing their sins."
John "preached the baptism of repentance unto
remission of sins." But the remission would seem to be
not a present fact, but the pledge of a future grace.
The Baptist himself insisted on the provisional, pre
paratory, prophetic character of his baptism. "There
cometh after me He that is mightier than I, the latchet
of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and
unloose. I baptized you with water; but He shall
baptize you with the Holy Ghost." It was in view of
its preparatory character that the sinless Christ could
fitly submit to it. To the rest, indeed, the act of
preparation implied necessarily an act of repentance,
and the consecrating water was the symbol of purifica
tion ; but to the Messiah, standing on the threshhold of
His Divine enterprise, these secondary senses had no
meaning. His baptism proclaimed His mission, and
confessed His purpose. It "became" Him "thus to fulfil
all righteousness." It would seem that, for some while,
Christ's disciples perpetuated this preparatory baptism,

G 2

84 BAPTISM.

just as Christ Himself began His ministry with the
Baptist's summons to repentance, and announcement of
the kingdom. So S. Mark affirms — " Now after that
John was delivered up, Jesus came into Galilee, preach
ing the Gospel of God, and saying, The time is fulfilled,
and the kingdom of God is at hand : repent ye, and
believe the Gospel."

But, as our Lord went forward in His ministry, and
unfolded by gradual stages, as they were able to bear it,
the whole project of Redemption, the preparatory
preaching and baptism were replaced by the Gospel and
the Church. Christian baptism symbolized the first and
created the last. It brought into view, by the plain
testimony of its outward process, that primary and
essential aspect of the Gospel as a power of moral
purification and renewal : and by the formula prescribed
it bound these graces inseparably to the Person of
Christ as the Incarnate Word, revealing God and re
creating man. Thus the sacrament was a just and
eloquent summary of Christianity itself: and as such it
appears in the exhortations of the apostles. S. Paul,
for example, constantly makes appeal to the symbolism
of the sacrament, and its well-known character, when
he would recall his converts from the facile errors of
conduct to the divinely ordained standard of Christian
living. This is his habitual protest against moral laxity
— " but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye
were justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and
in the Spirit of our God." This is his characteristic
plea for a firm and courageous repudiation of evil on the
part of the baptized. " Know ye not that your body is

THE FORMULA OF BAPTISM. 85

a temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye
have from God ? and ye are not your own : for ye were
bought with a price : glorify God therefore in your
body." This two-fold effect of baptism, the remission
of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit, is plainly stated
by S. Peter to the penitents of Pentecost. " Repent ye,
and be baptized ever}' one of you in the name of Jesus
Christ unto the remission of your sins : and ye shall
receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."

The question was hotly debated in the third century,
and has been revived in modern times, whether the
Apostles in baptizing used the full trinitarian formula,
which S. Matthew ascribes to Christ. It must be
admitted that all the evidence of the New Testament
points to the conclusion that they did not. S. Peter, in
bidding his hearers be baptized " in the Name of Jesus
Christ" seems to have illustrated, if he did not also
determine, the practice of the Apostolic Church. Thus
the Samaritans were " baptized into the Name of the
Lord Jesus." Cornelius and his household were by
S. Peter " commanded to be baptized in the name of
Jesus Christ ; " S. Paul baptized the twelve disciples of
the Baptist whom he found at Ephcsus " into the Name
of the Lord Jesus." It seems impossible to doubt that
this was the accustomed formula in apostolic times. In
the third century S. Cyprian denied the validity of '
Baptism thus administered which had by that time
contracted associations of heresy. He attempted, with
more courage than success, to explain the language of
the New Testament. He would have it that baptism
into the Name of Christ was only used in the ca.se of

86 BAPTISM.

Jews who already believed in the Father and had
already received the ancient baptism of Moses and
the law. 1 But this " neat ingenuity," as Archbishop
Benson not inaptly styled it, breaks down before the
fact that the formula is used for the baptism of the
Gentile Cornelius. S. Cyprian's rigid doctrine was
opposed by Pope Stephen : and to " one of the
prelates in the entourage of Stephen" we probably
owe a remarkable tract, De Rcbaptismatc, in which
the whole subject is discussed with a justice and
liberality which are hardly less unusual than admirable
in that controversial age, and the validity of baptism
"in the Name of Jesus" is maintained. Bingham con
tends that the trinitarian formula, was generally insisted
on from the first, but he goes far to discount his own
conclusion when he admits that S. Basil had to argue
against the other practice, and that S. Ambrose
definitely approved it. The latter held that " Oui unum
dixerit, Trinitatem signavit " — " He who has named one
Person, has indicated the Trinity," and we may agree to
this, in view especially of S. Paul's language about the
Sacrament, and the trinitarian formula, with which the
Second Epistle to the Corinthians concludes. 2

In the apostolic age the insistence on precise
religious formula? which marked later ages was unknown.
The Holy Spirit moved and acted within the Church
with a power and freedom which disdained the strict
limits which afterwards were recognized and enforced.
It implies a grave anachronism to read back into the

1 Vide S. Cyprian, Ep. Ixxiii. 17.

- Vide Bingham, Antiquities, bk. xi. c. 3, vol. iii. 4267.

ANALOGY OF CIRCUMCISION. 87

time of the apostles the rigid theories and relentless
logic of subsequent times.

Baptism, I said, created the Church. It was, pre
eminently, the act by which the individual penitent was
bound into the Christian society. " In one Spirit,"
writes S. Paul, " were we all baptized into one body,
whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free; and
were all made to drink of one Spirit." And hence
arose the parallel which the Christian writers, including
the apostles, established between baptism and circum
cision. Coleridge displayed less than his wonted acute-
ness when he swept aside as " vain " what he called
" the pretended analogy of circumcision." It is true that
circumcision was " the means and mark of national
distinction," but it had come to be much more. In the
current belief of that age, it was clothed with a truly
sacramental character, and the nation into which circum
cision admitted men, was essentially a church. The
Apostles, apparently without effort, carried over to the
Christian society the names and attributes of the sacred
nation. S. Paul calls the Church " the Israel of God,"
and S. Peter, when at the end of his career he addressed
the Gentile believers of Asia, adopted the familiar
expressions of the old covenant, in order to express
the graces of the new. " Ye are an elect race, a royal
priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own
possession, that ye may show forth the excellencies of
Him who called you out of darkness into His marvellous
light : which in time past were no people, but now are
the people of God : which had not obtained mercy, but
now have obtained mercy."

88 BAPTISM.

The preaching of St. Peter finds its appropriate cftect
in the creation of a society. " They then that received
his word were baptized, and there were added unto them
in that day about three thousand souls." It would be
irrational to press the statement — it belongs, as I said a
fortnight ago, to the category of symbolic narratives ;
and we need not build anything on such a detail as the
precise number of converts ; but the important truth
leaps to the eyes. Christianity, from the first, expressed
itself in a society. The Church is no after-thought, no
creature of late-discovered necessity, no bastard progeny
of superstition and craft, but the original design of Christ
— the very work of the Apostles. Nearly thirty years
ago, Dean Stanley suggested that "complete individual
isolation from all ecclesiastical organisations whatever "
might be " the ultimate issue to which the world is
tending." Certainly the suggestion has lost none of its
plausibility in the generation which has passed since it
was made. He must be blind and deaf who does not
see on all hands evident and sinister tokens of the
dislike and disgust with which religious men regard the
churches. Nevertheless, it cannot be superfluous or
irrelevant to point out to all those to whom the New
Testament is still venerable, and the authority of the
Apostles still weighty, that Christianity can only become
frankly individualist by repudiating its first founders,
stultifying its original constitution, and giving the lie to
its first principles. All the scandals of nineteen scan
dalous centuries cannot bury in oblivion the fact, or
disallow the ideal of the Christian Church.

Christianity is essentially and incorrigibly social. The

SOCIAL CHARACTER OF CHRISTIANITY. 89

" new birth " in baptism implies the new patriotism ; that
" Our citizenship is in heaven " is a proclamation of civic
duty, as well as an assertion of spiritual franchise.
Baptism creates equality because it confers a status, and
that, the status which precludes every notion of privilege.
" For ye are all sons of God, through faith in Christ
Jesus, for as many of you as were baptized into Christ
did put on Christ. There can be neither Jew nor Greek,
there can be neither bond nor free, there can be no male
and female: for ye all are one man in Christ Jesus."
Between us and those generous words of S. Paul lie the
centuries of Christian history, and the words reach us
to-day, as a message called over the ocean through the
roar of the tempest, strangely, in unnatural tones,
ominous of ruin. What are the commentaries of time
on the aspirations of apostles ? What are the verdicts
of experience on the projects of saints ? The Church
is here still ; and the words of S. Paul. Bitter contrast,
strange contradiction ! \Ve, too, are baptized, and on us
lies the burden of the great ideal. " None of us liveth
to himself, and none dieth to himself." Is it not well
that we should recall, with shame and penitence, but not
less with purpose and faith, what Baptism declares and
implies, as truly now, on the threshold of the twentieth
century, as then in the heart of the first ?

APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY.— IV.

THE CHURCH.

Preached on the %th Sunday after Trinity, July 28///, 1901,
in S. Margaret's, Westminster.

AND THEY CONTINUED STEDFASTLY IN THE APOSTLES' TEACHING
AND FELLOWSHIP, IN THE BREAKING OF BREAD AND THE PRAYERS.

— Acts ii. 42.

IN these words are set out "the characteristic marks
of the new Christian life" to which the converts of
Pentecost were pledged by their Baptism. The apostles
stand out as the core of the Church. About them the
new disciples are gathered ; from them the doctrine and
discipline of the infant society proceed ; they constitute
a visible centre of unity. The words of S. Luke are
not altogether free from ambiguity. The text itself is
somewhat uncertain, and the interpretation is disputed.
Probably we shall be well advised if, following the lead
of Dr. Hort, we limit the reference of "the apostles" to
the "teaching," and read "the fellowship" without modifi
cation. He renders the passage thus : " And the}- were
continuing stedfastly with the teaching of the apostles

KOTES OF THE CHURCH. 91

and with the communion, with the breaking of the bread
and with the prayers."

We have here, then, four principal " notes " of the
Christian Church, as it appeared in the beginning of its
history. I shall submit that these still remain the
essential characteristics of the Divine society.

i. ''The teaching of the apostles" was clearly of
necessity in the case of those early believers. " Their
rudimentary faith needed a careful and continuous
instruction, an instruction which replaced that which the
Scribes were in the habit of giving, so that in the most
literal sense the apostles might now be called scribes
become disciples to the Kingdom, bringing out of their
treasure things new and old, the new tale of the ministry
and glory of Jesus, the old promises and signs by which
law and prophets had pointed onward to Him and His
kingdom." l

The " teaching of the apostles " had a far wider range
when their disciples were not converted Jews, but con
verted heathen. Then they had to create a new morality,
to lay firmly that foundation which the Jews had
received from their long tradition of legal righteousness,
to adapt the principles of Christ to the novel conditions
of Gentile life. Even a superficial study of S. Paul's
epistles enables us to understand the magnitude of the
task which rested on the apostles as religious teachers.
Take, for sufficient example, the First Epistle to the
Corinthians. We find clearly indicated there a teaching
extraordinary in depth, range, and variety. S. Paul
brings to the Corinthians the knowledge of Christ's life
1 Vide Hort, 'juduistic Christianity, p. 42.

92 THE CHURCH.

and death, and the substance of His revelation. He
interprets the Old Testament in the light of Christian
belief; he develops a detailed doctrine of the person
and work of our Saviour. Consider how large a back
ground of theological knowledge, built up in the
Corinthians by systematic teaching, is implied in such a
verse as this : " But of Him (i.e., God) are ye in Christ
Jesus, Who was made unto us wisdom from God, and
righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption."

Is it not suggestive that we should find the great key
words of the Pauline theology in the least theological of
his epistles ? In this same epistle to the Corinthians
we find a very definite and rich teaching about the Holy
Spirit, an eschatological doctrine of great range and
richness, the most careful moral teaching, and the
delivery of practical rules, customs of the Christian
society, which the apostle docs not hesitate to impose
on the Corinthians. No doubt S. Paul stood out from
the apostolic company as a great constructive theologian,
and we cannot suppose that the other apostles, with the
exception of S. John, were able to bring to their converts
so rich and varied a volume of sacred science ; but,
then, we must renjember that S. Paul, to use his own
phrase, " laboured more abundantly than they all," and
that, even in the apostolic age, his epistles were widely
disseminated.

Two documents have come down to our own time
with the claim to embody "the teaching of the apostles,"
and though neither can vindicate an apostolic origin, yet
both do certainly perpetuate aspects of the apostolic
work as the teachers of the Christian society. The

APOSTOLIC TEACHING. 93

oldest of these documents is a curious moral treatise
dating probably from the first half of the second century,
though it may be much older, and actually entitled
The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. It illustrates the
work, which, especially among the Gentile converts, fell
on the apostles as creators of a Christian morality, which
should replace the depraved and perverted traditions of
heathen life. The other document, later in actual com
position, is not less apostolic in character. It is known
throughout the world as " the Apostles' Creed," the
baptismal confession of all Christian folk, in substance, if
not precisely in form, from the fourth century. But we
must be watchful against the anachronism which would
credit the Apostles with precise dogmatic forms, such as
were afterwards received in the Church on the authority
of their names. By the "teaching of the apostles," in
which the first Christians continued, we are not to under
stand a detailed moral code, or an elaborated creed, but
rather a progressive instruction, which included both
morals and doctrine, and addressed itself with rare
versatility to the novel and ever-varying requirements of
a quickly-expanding society. From the beginning, the
Church has possessed and depended upon a "teaching
ministry ; " and, though in later times, the reason of that
dependence may seem less evident, and for obvious
reasons the functions of the ministry have taken a less
exalted character, yet, when we consider that every
generation comes fresh to its problems, and that the
unalterable principles of the Gospel have to find applica
tion to circumstances which are always novel, we shall, I
think, be little disposed to question the title which the

94 THE CHURCH.

teaching ministry can still advance to the regard and
consideration of believers. It is not picturesque but
ineffectual rhetoric which leads us to adopt S. Luke's
phrase as a description of present fact. It is still the
case of loyal and prudent Christians that "they continue
stedfastly in the apostles' teaching," when they impose
on themselves as a standing obligation of a well-ordered
Christian life, the regular and devout attendance on the
work of the Christian preacher.

2. The second characteristic mark of apostolic
Christianity is "the communion" or "fellowship." Here,
again, we shall accept the guidance of Dr. Hort. He
understands by "the communion " "conduct expressive
of and resulting from the strong sense of fellowship with
the other members of the brotherhood, probably public
acts by which the rich bore some of the burdens of the
poor."1 It would seem, therefore, that we shall best
consider this subject in connection with that " Christian
Communism," which is described in the last paragraph
of the chapter before us, and which we are pledged to
discuss next Sunday.

3. We pass on then to the " breaking of bread." There
can be no question that here we have " the Holy Com
munion in its primitive form as an Agape or supper of
communion," - or rather as a commemoration asso
ciated with an Agape or supper of communion. For it
is manifest that, in considering the language of S. Luke,
we cannot separate it from that of his great master,
S. Paul. We are compelled to seek in the First Epistle

1 Vide The Christian Ecclcsia, p. 44.

2 Vide Hort, Judaistic Christianity, p. 43.

THE BREAKING OF BREAD. 95

to the Corinthians the meaning of this simple expres
sion, characteristic of the Acts, " the breaking of bread."
In the tenth and eleventh chapters of that epistle we
find what we want. S. Paul evidently describes the
Agape as preceding the Eucharist. The latter he
clearly asserts to be an institution of Christ, and to
bear a character of the utmost gravity. He rehearses
the history of that institution, and bases on it some
stern and awful censures of the profaneness which
marked the Corinthian practice. The " breaking of the
bread " was something more than the formal act by
which a social festivity was inaugurated. It was more
than an eloquent symbol — more than a solemn act of
commemoration. It was the current phrase for a
religious rite, to which the apostle evidently attributed
the greatest importance. The very phrase had historic
reference ; it was an appeal to the devout recollection of
Christians — it recalled and set before them the Master
Himself "in the night in which He was betrayed." The
bread which then He blessed and brake was identified
with the bread there placed on the table of the Eucharist,
and the cup was the same. So the apostle links together
the profanities of the Corinthian Eucharist and that last
supper in the room at Jerusalem, where Christ Himself
had instituted the sacrament. " For as often as ye eat
this bread and drink the cup ye proclaim the Lord's
death till He come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat the
bread or drink the cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be
guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. But let a
man prove himself, and so let him cat of the bread, and
drink of the cup. For he that eateth and drinketh,

96 THE CHURCH.

eateth and drinketh judgment unto himself, if he discern
not the body." I disclaim this morning all intention of
preaching on the Eucharist, but it is vital to my purpose
that I should make perfectly clear to you that the
Christian Church when it made " the breaking of bread "
one of its cardinal obligations was not concerned with a
harmless and even beautiful social custom merely, but
with a solemn sacrament, which reached down to the
depths of the religious life, and claimed the regard of
Christians by the most binding and awful of all names.
S. Paul's language may be, and has been, variously
understood, but no understanding of it, which does not
wholly explain it away, is patient of a low view of " the
breaking of bread." Turn to the tenth chapter of the
same epistle, and you are met by another and hardly less
solemn aspect of the Eucharist. In that chapter S. Paul
is warning the Corinthians against idolatry. They were
disposed to minimise the significance of their presence
at the idolatrous feasts, and partaking of sacrificial meats.
" What difference can the idols make ? " they said : " we
know that idols are really mere shams. Why should
we hold aloof from the society of our neighbours, because
they are so stupid as to think the feasts and the meats
in some sense sacred to the idols ? " S. Paul's method of
arguing is this. He points the Corinthians to the sacra
ment. What that sacrament means to you Christians, he
says, that the idol-feasts mean to your neighbours, and
will be understood to mean to you also. The heathen
expressed their religious unity with one another, and
with their gods, by those sacrificial feasts. To partake at
the idol table was to publicly unite oneself to the body

THE APOSTOLIC EUCHARIST. 97

of devotees, and to make oneself by solemn symbolic
act partaker of the idol's life. Therefore such partaking
involved nothing less than the negation of discipleship.
It stultified the Christian position. " I speak as to wise
men : judge ye what I say. The cup of blessing which
we bless, is it not a communion of (i.e., participation in)
the blood of Christ ? The bread which we break, is it
not a communion of the body of Christ ? seeing that we
who are many, are one bread, one body : for we all par
take of the one bread. ... Ye cannot drink the cup
of the Lord, and the cup of devils ; ye cannot partake
of the table of the Lord, and of the table of devils." It
is not uninteresting to compare with S. Paul's language
the eucharistic prayer preserved in the treatise to which
I have already alluded, The Teaching of the Twelve
Apostles. "As this broken bread was scattered upon
the mountains and gathered together became one, so let
Thy church be gathered together from the ends of the
earth into Thy kingdom, for Thine is the glory and
the power through Jesus Christ for ever."1 I disclaim
once more all intention of preaching on the Eucharist.
My end is gained if I make you see how much lies
behind that simple phrase "the breaking of bread."
However close the association of the Eucharist with
the Agape was in the apostolic age, it never went
so far as to submerge the distinctive character of the
Sacrament. S. Paul's Epistle to the Corinthians, not to
say, also, the Gospel of S. John, which certainly reflects
the eucharistic doctrine of the later apostolic age,

1 I have borrowed a paragraph from my Apostolic Christianity,
pp. 159, 1 60.

G.U. II

98

THE CHURCH.

absolutely prohibits the popular notion that the unique
and awful significance of the Holy Communion belongs
to the later period of the Church.

4. Finally, there is mention made of "the prayers."
These, in Dr. Hort's opinion, " are probably Christian
prayers at stated hours, answering to Jewish prayers.
If we knew more of the synagogue services in Palestine
as they were before the fall of Jerusalem, we should
perhaps find that these Christian prayers replaced
synagogue prayers (which, it must be remembered, are
not recognized in the law), as the apostles' teaching
may be supposed to have replaced that of the scribes." l
We know that the Christians in Jerusalem, so long as
the temple existed, were accustomed to attend its regular
services, and it may well be the case that they also
developed a synagogue service of their own. S. James,
who presided over that church, speaks of the Christian
" synagogue." It is certain that the synagogue provided
the model after which the liturgical services of the Church
were originally fashioned — although from the first there
were new elements, such as the reading of the apostolic
epistles, the exercise of spiritual gifts, the use of the
Lord's Prayer, and, possibly also, Christian hymns, which
gave a distinctive aspect to the worship of the Christian
synagogue. The silly prejudice against liturgical forms,
which in later times, and notably in our country, has been
extensively manifested, receives no countenance from the
precedents of the apostolic age.

Such, then, were the conspicuous features of the earliest
Church — a teaching ministry, an active fellowship, the
1 Vide Judaistic Christianity, p. 44.

PRESENT CONDITIONS. 99

sacrament of Holy Communion, and regular liturgical
worship. "They continued stedfastly in the apostles'
teaching, and in fellowship, in the breaking of bread
and the prayers." I said at the beginning of my sermon
that I should submit to you that this is still an
accurate description of the Christian Church. Let
me in my concluding words justify that contention.
For justification is apparently necessary. We have
travelled far from the standpoints and methods of the
Apostolic Church in respect to all the four cardinal
features of its life. The function of the Christian
ministry, as pre-eminently a didactic and pastoral func
tion, has been largely obscured for centuries together,
and over great part of Christendom at this moment, by
another and an alien conception, partly taken over from
Judaism, partly borrowed from paganism, I mean, the
sacerdotal conception ; and while this fact has injured
the Christian ministry by diverting its efforts from the
true channel, and lowering the standard of its intellectual
achievement, it has directly fostered in the laity that
impatience of Christian teaching, which for other reasons
too easily affected them. We see the result in the pre
sent state of the Church. Of the decay of " fellowship "
before the growth of an irrational and irreligious
individualism I can better speak next Sunday, when we
have before us the fact of apostolic altruism. The
"breaking of bread" is still a prominent feature in the
modern church, but hardly in the old way. Its social
character which, as we have seen, was conspicuous in the
apostolic age, and which formed the assumption of the
Pauline argument, has almost died away in front of

H 2

TOO

THE CHURCH.

conceptions, which, if true, arc exaggerated, and are not
always even true— conceptions metaphysical and sacri
ficial — of which the apostolic age had no knowledge.
On this matter I must speak to you on other occasions,
but I cannot pass away from it without confessing the
grief and anxiety which I feel at the apparent neglect of
the Holy Communion which obtains among the members
of this congregation. I suspect that there is some deep
misconception on the subject in some of your minds,
and that until that is removed, you will remain aliens
from the "breaking of bread." With respect to "the
prayers," that is, the regular public service, there is
no need to point a fact which " leaps to the eyes " of
every observer. Church-going is waning among us ;
waning in extent, degenerating in motive. None the
less, though for the present the stream of tendency runs
strongly against the Christian tradition of apostolic
practice, the ancient, standing elements of Christian duty
remain guaranteed by their correspondence to deep,
inveterate, perpetual human needs. Teaching, fellow
ship, Eucharist, common prayer — these are the pillars of
the Church, because they are the sustenance of disciple-
ship ; and whosoever, claiming the Christian name,
neglects or repudiates them, is not merely weakening the
Christian society by defrauding it of its right, but also,
and not less evidently, is impoverishing and imperilling
his own religious life.

APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY.— V.

CHRISTIAN COMMUNISM.

Preached on the g/A Sunday after Trinity, August 4///, 1901,
/;/ 5". Margaret's, Westminster.

AND FEAR CAME UPON F.VERY SOUL: AND MANY WONDERS AND
SIGNS WERE DONE BY THE APOSTLES. AND ALL THAT BELIEVED
WERE TOGETHER, AND HAD* ALL THINGS COMMON ; AND THEY SOLD
THEIR POSSESSIONS AND GOODS, AND PARTED THEM TO ALL,
ACCORDING AS ANY MAN HAD NEED. AND DAY BY DAY, CONTINUING
STEDFASTLY WITH ONE ACCORD IN THE TEMPLE, AND BREAKING
BREAD AT HOME, THEY DID TAKE THEIR FOOD WITH GLADNESS AND
SINGLENESS OF HEART, PRAISING GOD, AND HAVING FAVOUR WITH
ALL THE PEOPLE. AND THE LORD ADDED TO THEM DAY BY DAY
THOSE THAT WERE BEING SAVED. — Acts II. 43-47.

ON the morrow of a spiritual decision rises the
problem of its practical application. How may it be
fitted into the order of life ? Precisely in proportion to
the novelty and extent of the new principles which have
been accepted must be the disturbance caused by them
in the sphere of customary- conduct. Our Saviour had
employed a striking metaphor in order to indicate both
the necessity and the character of the practical revolution

102 CHRISTIAN COMMUNISM.

which discipleship would draw in its train. " No man,"
He said, "putteth a piece of undressed cloth upon an
old garment; for that which should fill it up taketh
from the garment, and a worse rent is made. Neither
do men put new wine into old wine-skins : else the skins
burst, and the wine is spilled, and the skins perish : but
they put new wine into fresh wine-skins, and both are
preserved." The history of Christianity has been the
illustration of these profound words. External con
ditions have had to conform themselves to the spirit of
the Gospel, but this end has not been reached quickly
or easily. The process of reconciliation has proceeded
through the stages of friction, experiment, compromise,
surrender. There have been chapters of failure and
episodes of violence; but the end has never been wholly
lost to view, and, by gradual approaches, some progress
towards it has been made. In the apostolic age we see,
as in a mirror, the problem of the centuries. The fresh
forces of discipleship beat like an angry and advancing
tide against the barriers of custom, and, in all directions,
break them down.

With dramatic propriety and sound moral insight
S. Luke places the picture of Christian Communism in
immediate connection with the enthusiasm of Pentecost.
Discipleship is a masterful and aggressive principle,
which seizes and bends to its will the whole framework
of life. There is direct and apparent relation between
the theory and the practice of these first believers. This
relation becomes the more evident if we adopt the difficult,
but on that account probably more accurate, reading
adopted by the great scholar and bishop, whose recent

PRECEDENT OF THE GOSPEL. 103

loss we all deplore, in the text which is familiarly known
to all students as that of " Westcott and Hort." We
shall then read that " all that believed together had all
things common." The common faith expresses itself in
the common ownership ; fraternity implies communism.
This is justly called " a peculiar but pregnant description
of membership." But we must inquire what exactly
S. Luke's language describes, what actually was the
famous communism of the Apostolic Church. We
cannot forget that the apostles had behind them the
recollection of the common life which for three years
they had lived with their Master. They had been
maintained during their ministry by the free gifts of
disciples, and a common bag had held their slender but
sufficient treasure. From it they had been accustomed
"to give something to the poor" as well as "to buy such
things as they needed." It was the most natural thing in
the world that the apostles, when, after the resurrection,
they assumed the government of the Christian society,
should revert to this familiar and venerated precedent.
They would look to the pious bounty of the wealthier
disciples to supply a common fund from which they
themselves might be maintained, and the needs of the
poorer believers supplied. They proceeded on no prin
ciple of the invalidity of private possession, but appealed
successfully to the large-hearted charity of their brethren.
" There was no merging of all private possessions in a
common stock, but a voluntary and variable contribution
on a large scale." l

All the evidence of the New Testament confirms this
1 Vide Hort's Christian Ecclesia, p. 48,

io4 CHRISTIAN COMMUNISM.

view of the communism of the Apostolic Church. In
the fourth chapter of the Acts, S. Luke describes more
exactly what took place, and again you observe how
straitly he connects the religious agreement of the
disciples with their mutual help. "And the multitude
of them that believed were of one heart and soul : and
not one of them said that aught of the things which he
possessed was his own : but they had all things common.
. . . For neither was there among them any that
lacked : for as many as were possessors of lands or
houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things
that were sold, and laid them at the apostles' feet ; and
distribution was made unto each, according as any one
had need." Then follow the contrasted histories of
Barnabas and of Ananias and Sapphira. The credit
ascribed to the action of the first, and the guilt attached
to that of the last alike imply the fullest recognition of
private ownership. S. Peter's words to Ananias explicitly
affirm as much : " Why hath Satan filled thy heart to
lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the
price of the land ? Whiles it remained, did it not remain
thine own ? and after it was sold was it not in thy power ?"
The " daily ministration " in which the Hellenists were,
or thought themselves to be, " neglected," is most easily
regarded as a charitable provision for the poorer disciples
rather than a common table for the whole society of
Christians.

The appeal for relief addressed on behalf of the
famine-stricken Church in Jerusalem to the more pros
perous churches of the Gentiles presupposes that liberal
almsgiving, rather than communism, was the recognized

RECOGNITION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY. 105

Christian practice. It is certain that individual members
of the Church in Jerusalem retained their property even
in the fervour of those first days, and were by no means
on that account the objects of apostolic disfavour. Mary,
the mother of Mark, is said to have possessed a house
which was the scene of Christian assemblies : and
S. James, in an epistle which seems to uncover to view
the inner life of the Church in Jerusalem in its season of
prosperity, describes a society in which rich men play
a prominent and unworthy part. It is impossible to
connect a prohibition of private ownership with the
Christian " synagogue," in which honour is given to the
" man with a gold ring in fine clothing," while " the poor
man " is thrust ignominiously aside. In the Gentile
churches, whose life is pictured in such detail in the
Pauline epistles, no one supposes that communism at
any time existed, and this circumstance itself adds, in
no slight degree, to the improbability of communism in
the parent church of Jerusalem.

We may accept, then, the view that the Apostolic
Church, illustrious for the ardour of self-sacrifice which
freely surrendered property for the relief of common
needs, never adopted any hostility to the principle of
private ownership ; that self-sacrifice was stimulated by
the conviction that the pursuit of wealth and the enjoy
ment of possessions were incompatible with the expec
tation of Christ's speedy return as Judge, and spiritually
harmful ; and that the primitive enthusiasm which moved
individuals to large surrenders of property soon subsided
before the sobering influences of time, prudence, and
prosperity. It has been said with truth that " the usages

106 CHRISTIAN COMMUNISM.

of the primitive Church arc mirrored in the Gospels."
There we find, side by side with the normal ministries
of almsgiving, conspicuous examples of abnegation, such
as that of Zacchaeus, who seems, as an act of penitence,
to have surrendered all his property to the objects of
restitution and charity ; and we see that our Saviour
distinctly authorised an habitual contempt for wealth,
not merely by asserting in very solemn words its spiritual
disadvantages, but also by addressing to individuals
direct calls to renunciation. The effect of Christ's
teaching and example is seen in the action of the
apostolic society.

It has, however, been suggested that the communism
of the apostolic church had another character corre
sponding to another origin. The source of the Christian
practice has been found by some students in the practice
of the most interesting of contemporary Jewish sects —
that of the Essenes. We may freely admit that between
the accounts which Philo and Josephus give of the
Essenes, and that which the New Testament gives of
the first Christians, there is a curious and impressive
resemblance. " Their love of virtue," says Philo,
" revealed itself in their indifference to money, worldly
position and pleasure. Their love of man in their
kindliness, their equality, their fellowship passing all
words. For no one had his private house, but shared
his dwelling with all : and, living as they did in colonies,
they threw open their doors to any of their sect who
came their way. They had a storehouse, common
expenditure, common raiments, common food eaten in
Syssitia, or common meals. This was made possible

THE ESSENES. 107

by their practice of putting whatever they each earned
day by day into a common fund, out of which also the
sick were supported when they could not work. The
aged among them were objects of reverence and honour,
and treated by the rest as parents by real children."
Josephus speaks in similar terms of these ascetic Jews.
" They owned no slaves," he says, " and were wholly
devoted to agricultural pursuits. They despised wealth
and shared their possessions, so that a rich man among
them had no more enjoyment of his own property than
had a member who owned nothing. For in entering
their sect a man made over his property to the institu
tion. There was no buying and selling between
members ; but the elected stewards administered the
common fund, impartially satisfying the needs of all
alike. In every city a special relieving officer was
appointed to take care of the garments and supplies of
the sect and entertain its travelling members." Mr.
Conybeare, from whose learned and interesting account
in the new Dictionary of tlic Bible I have been quoting,
enumerates a great number of " striking traits " which
were common to the Christians and the Essenes, but he
sweeps away with decision the notion that the former
can be identified with the latter. "It is a fatal objec
tion," he says, " to any real identification, that the
Essenes were ultra-Jewish in the observance of the
Sabbath, and, if we may credit Hippolytus, in their
insistence on the circumcision of converts. The most
we can say is that the Christians copied many features
of their organisation and propagandist activity from
the Essenes." But even this seems to be an excessive

loS CHRISTIAN COMMUNISM.

inference from the facts. In no matter must the student
be more suspicious than in suggestions of common
origin for similar phenomena. The similarity is often
superficial, the difference of principle and spirit absolute.
So in this plausible and attractive instance. The more
carefully we consider the parallels the less do they
justify any theory of mutual dependence. The Essenes
were mostly celibates ; in all cases they were rigorous
ascetics, the most punctilious of ceremonialists in certain
directions. They constituted rather a monastic order
than a church, and the rigour of their discipline
rendered expansion impossible. It is in this point
that Weizsacker finds the sharpest contrast with the
Christians.

The motive which prompted almsgiving so liberal as
to create a practical communism was fraternity, "love of
the brethren " : the ascetic motive of renunciation may
have entered, and in some cases been paramount, but
the generally operative cause was not ascetic. Christ's
example and " new commandment " held the Church to
self-sacrificing charity. But with the Essenes the pre
vailing motive was that ascetic principle, which induced
them, or the most part of them, to repudiate marriage.
"Indeed," says Bishop Lightfoot, "the communism of
the Christians was from the first wholly unlike the
communism of the Essenes. The surrender of property
with the Christians was not a necessary condition of
entrance into an order ; it was a purely voluntary act,
which might be withheld without foregoing the privileges
of the brotherhood. And the common life too was
obviously different in kind, at once more free and more

MONASTIC ISM. 109

sociable, unfettered by rigid ordinances, respecting
individual liberty, and altogether unlike a monastic
rule."1 In the "Teaching of the Apostles" we may,
perhaps, recognize the tradition of that apostolic "com
munism " which illustrated the first beginnings of the
Church. The appeal is still to an unlimited charity,
not to any principle of socialism. "Thou shalt not
turn away him that needeth, but shalt share all
things with thy brother, and shalt not say that they
are thine own : for if you are fellow-sharers in that
which is imperishable, how much more in perishable
things."2

Perhaps I have laboured at undue length a matter
which might be thought sufficiently obvious; and yet I
cannot think so, when I recall the inferences which have
been drawn from the traditional, but, as we have seen,
unhistoric "community of goods" in Jerusalem. The
monastic societies perpetuated, but transformed, the
original fraternity. In their hands it took a distinctly
ascetic character and approximated to the model of the
Essenes. Christian history has witnessed the whole
cycle of monastic development, and delivers no doubtful
verdict on that mode of realising the purpose of Christ.
It moves on a false principle through stages of advancing
degeneration to a barren and inglorious conclusion.
Monasticism is a great digression in the continuous
record of Christianity, and in order to return to the
main stream we must leave it on one side. We have to
grasp the universal obligation of Christian fraternity,

1 Vide Esscnism and Christianity in Colossians, p. 416.
" Didcuhe, c. iv. 3, SchaflPs ed.,p. 175.

no CHRISTIAN COMMUNISM.

and to vindicate a satisfaction of it within our own
personal lives.

No doubt it was comparatively an easy thing to
perceive and even to respect the lines of social duty
within a society which was small in numbers, clearly
marked in character, and held together by the relent
less and continuing pressure of persecution. It is
not so easy now. The Church, in the course of many
ages, has silently grown into the texture of civilised
society, and Christians hardly distinguish between the
claims which arise from religion and those which, what
ever their origin, reach them as part of the tradition of
social life.

It is well to remember that discipleship does imply
a doctrine and treatment of our property which,
judged by accepted mundane standards, arc almost
revolutionary. We are not free to exempt ourselves
from that fundamental law of self- sacrifice which
was proclaimed and exemplified on Calvary. I should
be untrue to myself, and false to my duty, if I did
not confess to you that the prevailing fashion of life
among us seems to me, from the Christian standpoint,
pitiably, painfully unworthy. The use to which we put
our possessions is, perhaps, as good a test of our religion
as any we can find, at least for application, not to others
whose motives and circumstances we cannot know, but
to ourselves. It is surely apparent to every one who,
with honest mind and unbiassed judgment, considers
the Christian society of this country, that the expendi
ture of income is in the case of most of us hardly related
at all, in any responsible and continuous way, to our

DUTY OF THE CHURCH. in

religious duty. The waxing display and extravagance
of English society, which arrests the notice of every
observer, and wakes the alarm of every patriot, cannot
be reconciled with cliscipleship to Jesus Christ. The
mischief goes deeper than we know. A false and self-
indulgent habit of living, illustrated in high places and
commended by great examples, spreads rapidly through
the whole nation. Discontent in the masses of the
unprivileged reflects and rebukes pride and luxury in
the ranks of the privileged. The Christian Church is
plainly false to its mission if it does not conspicuously
and continuously resist the drift towards materialism
which inevitably accompanies expansion of empire and
increase of national wealth. But the Church is only the
sum of the disciples, and its action is the sum of theirs.
We must begin, where alone our responsibility is obvious
and plenary, and our liberty of action complete, with
ourselves. Let us also, as those first believers, continue
in " the communion," that is, in the habitual recognition
of the fellowship of Christians, a recognition which finds
its natural, normal expression in serviceable acts. Let
us, in the administration of our incomes, large or small
(their amount cannot affect the principle which governs
expenditure), keep before ourselves the apostolic ideal
interpreted by the apostolic practice : " Not one of
them said that aught of the things which he possessed
was his own ; but they had all things common." We
shall regard our property without arrogance and employ
it without selfishness. Our Master's word, "It is more
blessed to give than to receive," will be less and less a
paradox as we put it into practice, and seek our

112

CHRISTIAN COMMUNISM.

happiness in works of mercy. His strange oracle shall
fulfil itself in us, as, treading in His footsteps, we make
an active benevolence the law of our lives: — "Make to
yourselves friends by means of the mammon of un
righteousness ; that, when it shall fail, they may receive
you into the eternal tabernacles."

CHURCH CONGRESS SERMON.

Preached in All Saints' Church, Hove, on September 2<)//i, 1901, in
connection with the Brighton Church Congress.

HE ENDURED, AS SEEING HIM WHO IS INVISIBLE. — HebrCIVS xi. 27.

ON this Festival we are led to think of those unseen
powers, beneficent and hostile, which are interested in
our spiritual conflict, and which we cannot wisely or
piously leave out of reckoning. Our Saviour has taught
us very little about the " angels " and " demons " whose
existence and activity He unquestionably affirmed. The
imposing mass of traditional angelology has slight claim
on our acceptance, being, so far as we can discover, a
heterogeneous creation of presumptuous logic, and still
more presumptuous fancy, working upon the inex
haustible material of human fear and credulity. Christ
lifted the veil which shrouds the unseen world from
mortal ken. He established its reality. He made us
see its direct and intimate influence on the temporal
life. He showed us that the mysterious conflict which
we know within ourselves stands in relation to another
warfare, in which He Himself is the protagonist on
the one side, and Satan, the " prince of this world," the

G.U. I

u4 CHURCH CONGRESS SERMON.

" murderer from the beginning," the " father of lies," is
the protagonist on the other. He did not by so much as
one word encourage our curiosity. He limited His
revelation to those broad outlines of truth which were
sufficient to give us the just sense of proportion in the
judgment of life, which could sober and chasten us, and
induce that disposition of dependence which is the
proper attitude of a religious mind; and there His teach
ing stopped. We were left with the knowledge of the
unseen world, and its potencies of good and evil, and
the assurance that Christ was supreme there, the King
of angels and the Conqueror of Satan. The reticence
of the Master was followed by His apostles. The
epistles do not advance one step beyond the gospels.
The facts of the existence and conflict of angels and
demons is everywhere assumed, and made the basis
of solemn moral warnings ; but it is the figure of Christ
Himself which fills the whole horizon of Christian faith,
and provides the whole security of Christian hope.
" Worshipping of the angels " is a Gnostic folly against
which S. Paul warns the Colossians. He dwells on the
spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places only
that he may the more effectually urge the Ephesians
to "take up the whole armour of God." In like manner
the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews exalts Christ
as by virtue of His Divine Sonship inherently superior
to the angels, whom he describes as His agents — "minis
tering spirits sent forth to do service for the sake of
them that shall inherit salvation." He describes Christ's
victory over Satan in the power of His incarnation.
"Since, then, the children are sharers in flesh and blood,

THE FACULTY OF FAITH. 115

He also Himself in like manner partook of the same,
that through death He might bring to nought him that
had the power of death, that is, the devil, and might
deliver all them who, through fear of death, were all
their lifetime subject to bondage."

I trust you will pardon me if I content myself on
this occasion with this brief reference to the festival,
and turn to considerations which are not, indeed, alien
to its witness, but which are directly related to the
Church Congress, now about to assemble in this
neighbourhood. On such an occasion it cannot be
untimely, I hope it will not be found unprofitable, to
speak of the duties, dangers, and hopes of the Church
of England. For my text I have chosen a sentence
from that famous record of the heroes of faith which
the sacred writer rehearses in order to stir up his
brethren to more earnest service and more watchful
behaviour in a time of trouble and perplexity. The
words occur in the description of Moses. " By faith
he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king, for
he endured as seeing Him Who is invisible."

This faculty of faith, which is the power of endurance
under circumstances of alarm and peril, might be
analysed into the two qualities of insight and foresight.
By it the patriot Moses was enabled to divine the actual
relative importance of the facts of experience, and to
look beyond the present, and see the ultimate destiny of
things. Pharaoh's wrath was no doubt at the moment
very formidable, but to one who had realized that
Pharaoh was opposing himself to the Divine purpose,
and who could therefore see the king's final overthrow

I 2

u6 CHURCH CONGRESS SERMON.

as an assured event, his wrath, however fierce, was
stripped of terror. The wretched bondsmen of Israel
were to all outward appearance a forlorn and undone
people, with whom it would be perilous to be associated,
but to one who could see through that miserable aspect
to the intrinsic and undying superiority which Israel
possessed in the covenant relationship with the God of
Abraham, all this external weakness counted for noth
ing. What S. John says of the Christian faith might be
said of all faith in some sense and measure. It is " the
victor),' which overcometh the world."

" He endured as seeing Him Who is invisible." This
faith — insight and foresight — seems to be the special
grace for which, at this time, we who are members of
the Church of England should make our prayer to God.
For the circumstances under which we must now work
are extremely difficult and dangerous. Besides the
perplexities which arise from the transitional character
of the time, and are therefore common to all Christian
churches, there are other and formidable problems
which belong exclusively to our own church. It is not
excessive to say that the value, if not the existence, of
the Church of England depends, so far as human judg
ment can determine, on her power to answer certain
questions proposed to her by the actual conditions of
her life. I will ask you to consider only three of these
questions : —

i. There is, in the first place, the question which
immediately suggests itself to every thoughtful student
of the national life, how Christianity is to recover
possession of the multitudes now, for many cogent

CHRISTIANITY IN ENGLAND. 117

reasons, lying outside the faith and profession of Christ.
It is much in fashion, I know, especially at general
assemblies of church folk, to indulge in much self-
congratulatory optimism on this subject. I must
honestly say that I do not see any good ground for such
optimism. We are, as I see the facts, steadily losing
our hold on the popular mind, and the actual position
which we possess at this moment is, when justly con
sidered, wonderfully inadequate to the traditions and
professions of a National Church. This is an age of
careful statistics, and we are, so to say, compelled to
face facts which at other times and with less relentless
accuracy might have been slurred over, or altogether
ignored. We know now that in a population of
32,000,000 people less than 2,000,000 are com
municants ; that out of an electorate of five and a
quarter millions (I speak, of course, only of England
and Wales) there are certainly less than 400,000 com
municants — about one in thirteen. I am not one who
would willingly underrate or belittle the religious
work of the Nonconformists : but, when the most
liberal estimate is made of it, I do not think any com
petent judge would allow it to exceed the work of the
National Church. Assume, for our present purpose, that
the Church and the Nonconformists equally divide the
religious allegiance of the English people, and even so
is it not a melancholy and suggestive fact that a majority
of the nation which cannot be less than three-fifths, and
may be as much as four-fifths, lies outside the regular
profession of Christianity? It will, no doubt, be said
that the influence of Christianity extends far beyond the

ii8 CHURCH CONGRESS SERMON.

limits of its regular profession, and that is true. The
Church of Christ is "the salt" and "light of the world,"
as well as the family of God. But this also must be
remembered : that a Christianity which is divorced from
regular profession — that is, destitute of sacramental
graces, of spiritual teaching, of the salutary and manifold
disciplines of ecclesiastical life — is in an abnormal state,
which cannot be maintained, which must either mature
into conscious and avowed cliscipleship, or wither away
into utter irreligion. And here it seems impossible to
dispute the anti-religious bias of modern life. We have
lost the primary schools over most part of the country,
including the towns, where the population tends to
aggregate ; he would be a courageous prophet who would
assure us that we shall retain such schools as we still
possess. A great and increasing proportion of English
folk is growing up in ignorance of the elementary
Christian truths, which are at once the principles of
Christian morality and the assumptions of the Christian
religion. They are better informed on a hundred
matters; their wits have been sharpened, their ambitions
kindled, their standard of contentment indefinitely
raised, but morally they are untaught ; in character they
are undeveloped. On the deeper side of their being
they must be described in S. Paul's sad and searching
phrase as " having no hope, and without God in the
world." The problem before the National Church is hardly
misdescribed as that of the re-conversion of the English
people. In the twentieth century, among a civilized
community, and without the sympathy, still less the
assistance, of the State, the Church has to attempt again

RELIGIOUS DIVISIONS. 119

the task which in some measure she achieved in the
sixth and seventh centuries among our rude and ignorant
ancestors.

2. In the next place there emerges the question, which
on many sides is being eagerly and anxiously asked,
why, in face of a task so gigantic, the forces of Chris
tianity cannot be unified and united. Of all Churches,
perhaps the Church of England has suffered most from
religious division, and, at this moment, all the world
knows that we are deeply divided. The mischiefs
which have come upon religion from this source are in
calculable. Let me give but one example. If we lose
altogether from our national education what we have
already lost in great measure — the regular teaching of
the Christian faith as the basis of morality — it will not be
because the English people hate or distrust the religion
of which they have largely abandoned the formal pro
fession, but because the Nonconformists suspect the
Church so much that they would rather see the schools
secularist than Anglican. I am not allotting blame, but
stating facts. Responsibility for every disaster which
follows on the conflicts of religious men rarely belongs
to one side only. I am sure it does not in this case ; let
the discredit attach to us both, but let us face the fact.
Why cannot the forces of Christianity be unified and
united ? We accept one another as spiritual teachers
while we repudiate one another's fellowship in worship
and work. We read with delight and accept with
reverence the teachings of those whom we shut out from
our pulpits and banish from our altars. We exalt one
another's piety, admire one another's labours, take

120 CHURCH CONGRESS SERMON.

advantage of one another's learning, and then, when
we come out from our studies and conferences in order
to enter the arena of practical work, we draw aside into
our several camps, and speak again the old unmeaning
shibboleths of party, and range ourselves once more in
battle array for the old futile causes. " Let love be
without hypocrisy," said S. Paul. Is there not a
great element of gratuitous hypocrisy in our religious
life ? You must forgive me for pressing this matter
on you. It is, I suppose, not the least valuable service
which a Church Congress can render, that church
people should be moved to think anxiously and honestly
about wider issues than those which commonly arrest
their notice. The tragedy of our unhappy divisions
lies in the fact that at bottom we are not divided.
It is but a few weeks since we all watched with
reverence the departure of a fellow-Christian, set on a
pinnacle of greatness, and struck down by cruel and
wanton crime. We did not deign to notice the
pitiful and irrelevant matter that the President was in
ecclesiastical description a Methodist. We knew that
he was a Christian, and that sufficed. Yet in the
common intercourse of life we invert the order : it
is the Christianity we forget, the Methodism that
we remember. Again, I say, " Let love be without
hypocrisy."

Remember, it has not always been so in the Church
of England. There was a time when to advocate the
frank recognition of fellow-Protestants as, in the full
sense of the term, fellow-Christians was not thought
incompatible with loyalty to catholic truth. In the

THE OLDER ANGLICANS. 121

seventeenth century Bishop Andrewes, not the least
illustrious of Anglicans, made no scruple about adminis
tering the holy communion to the dying Huguenot
scholar, Isaac Casaubon. Amid the wild confusions
of the period of the Commonwealth, Jeremy Taylor,
the greatest Anglican of his age, could advance the
generous proposal that "all of us be united in that
common term, which as it does constitute the Church
in its being such, so it is the medium of the communion
of saints, and that is, the creed of the apostles ; and
in all other things an honest endeavour to find out what
truths we can, and a charitable and mutual permission
to others that disagree from us and our opinions." l
Archbishop Wake, the hero of an unsuccessful effort to
secure friendly relations with the Gallican Church,
rejoiced in the fact that Lutherans communicated with
out hindrance at English altars. 3 Every student of those
times could multiply examples of such Christian
liberality of mind. Is it not full of melancholy
suggestion that the Church of England, at the beginning
of the twentieth century, is less tolerant and more
exclusive than in the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries? It is, I know, our modern fashion to be
very lavish in complimentary speech ; it was not the
fashion then. Men said what they thought with brutal
frankness ; but they did sustain their words by corre
spondent action. On the whole, I think their way was
better than ours, and had more potentiality of good

1 Pref. to Liberty of Prophesying.

J Vitlt' Letter to Mr. Beauvoir, Feb. 24, 1718; apud Moshchn,
Ecclcsiiistiiul History, vol. iv., p. 530.

122 CHURCH CONGRESS SERMON.

in it. The courteous and almost fulsome language in
which we now indulge will only become tolerable to
me — I am sure it will only become compatible with our
self-respect — when we can, at least, communicate with
those we flatter. We may recall with advantage
S. John's counsel, " My little children, let us not love
in word, neither with the tongue, but in deed and
truth."

3. Finally, there is the question which both the
religious alienation of the people and the strife of
the churches unite to propose, How can the Christian
revelation be translated into the language of the
modern world, and shown to be in harmony with the
modern conscience ? There are, I know, some persons
who are offended at the very proposition of this
question. They think it answer sufficient to return
to the anxious inquiries of men, perplexed in mind
and conscience by doctrines that seem to them plainly
irrational and immoral, that the faith is unchangeable,
" once for all delivered to the saints." I doubt if any
verse in the Bible has been made to carry a heavier
burden of bigotry than that verse of S. Jude. But
I am not addressing myself to bigots, but to the loyal
members of that great, free National Church which,
as the Lutheran Mosheim said, "holds the first rank
among the reformed churches."

The problem which faces us is no new problem in
the history of the Church of Christ. At every epoch
of transition it has made its appearance. The faith is
God's "treasure," which we have "in earthen vessels," and
those vessels follow the law of all earthly things : they

THEOLOGICAL RE-STATEMENT. 123

\v\ir out and perish, and must be continually changed
and renewed. In the progressive development of man-
k'ind new truths are discovered : and these must be
related with the Christian revelation if it is to retain
its hold on men's minds and hearts. The faith has
many times in the past been restated in deference to
new truth. Our creeds are re-statements. "New
wine must be put into new wine-skins." It needs no
proving that we now stand as Christians confronted
by a mass of new truth, as yet unrelated with the
faith which we profess. The result is apparent in
widespread distress of mind. Men are tempted to
despair of Christianity, to say that it is one more dead
religion laid by in the cemetery of human hope, to
make shift to find in the doctrines of science some
working substitute for the faith they have lost. Is
the Church to stand by helpless and inactive while
this great apostasy is consummated ? Is she to mutter
over the unregarded or even repulsive formula.' in
which, with other notions and in other times, men
phrased the truth they held ? Or is the Church to
fasten her faith where alone it is changeless : not in
formula;, however sacred ; not in institutions, however
venerable ; not in activities, however beneficent ; but in
Him Who said, " Heaven and earth shall pass away,
but My Word shall not pass away " ? Is she to gird
herself anew for the great task by an act of faith
in " Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, to-day, yea,
and for ever " ? Shall she not also in this " cloudy
and dark day" of her proving "endure as seeing Him
Who is invisible" ?

i24 CHURCH CONGRESS SERMON.

The Church of England is rich in large hopes and
noble memories ; and though the situation in which
she now stands is plainly full of danger and difficulty,
she cannot despair. On all hands there are the tokens
of the presence within her of Divine life. She has
the grace to confess and bewail her faults, to wrestle
with her scandals, to seize her opportunities. The
Holy Spirit is working plainly, gloriously, in her midst.
This splendid church in which we are now assembled
is eloquent of hope. More, far more, has gone to its
building than the labour of the builders and the skill
of the architect. Faith to undertake so great a venture ;
zeal to persevere in so extensive a work ; love moving
to sacrifice in order to find the means for such costly
building — these " gifts of the Spirit " find here their
visible expression : and for these most of all do we
" thank God and take courage." Will you allow a
stranger to add his congratulation to the multitude
of congratulations which to clergy and people have
been coming on the practical achievement of this
notable and magnificent venture? I am grateful for
the privilege of being associated, in however lowly a
capacity, with your joy : and I pray God to let His
blessing rest evermore on this holy house. It is
related of the saintly Wulfstan, Bishop of Worcester,
that he wept when his new cathedral was finished.
" We are diligent," he said, " in piling up buildings
made of stone, but are too negligent of those living
temples which are the souls of men." That was a
natural reflection in those rude days when the mass
of men lived in squalor and hardship, scourged by

THE NEW PARISH CHURCH. 125

the twin miseries of ignorance and oppression. In
our time the antithesis is not so manifest between
glorious churches and neglected people ; but, we may
never wisely forget, even for one moment, that the whole
value and power of a church consists in the worship and
service to which it is ministerial. Only while we "see
Him Who is invisible" do we rescue our church life from
the stain of self-advertisement and the outrage of self-
seeking. These evil things, alas, are too often present
in our churches ; but here, by the grace of God, it shall
not be so. This glorious church shall extend on every
side the noble and wholesome influence of religion.
Men will go forth from it moved to fight the Lord's
battle against the various sin of the world where it
faces them in common life ; the intercourse of the
townsfolk in politics and business and pleasure will
become a purer, worthier thing because here they have
learned to see behind the march and pageantry of earth
Him, the " Invisible," Who alone gives meaning and
permanence to life : and the strangers seeking health
and rest who in time to come shall visit this place shall
feel, wherever they move, the influence of this house
of God —

" As if the streets were consecrated ground,
The city one vast temple."

AN APPEAL FOR UNITY.

Sermon preached on the 2otk Sunday after Trinity, October 2Ot/i,
1901, in Great S. Mary's Church^ Cambridge ', before the
University.

THEY SHALL BECOME ONE FLOCK, ONE SHEPHERD. — S, John X. l6.

MORE than four years ago the venerable Bishop of
Rome issued an encyclical letter on the unity of the
Church, which expressed, with a grace and fervour which
would lend distinction to the most conventional opinions,
a very ancient and a very mischievous error. The con
cluding section of that document is headed, " An Appeal
to Sheep not of the Fold," and there the language of
S. John's Gospel in the passage before us is made the
basis of an urgent exhortation to all non-Roman Christians
to accept the authority of the pope. With an audacity
which, perhaps, habit has obscured or wholly concealed,
the writer adopts the very language of Christ : " What
Christ has said of Himself, We may truly repeat of
Ourselves — ' Other sheep I have that are not of this
fold : them also I must bring, and they shall hear My
voice.' Let all those, therefore, who detest the widespread
irreligion of our times, and acknowledge and confess
Jesus Christ to be the Son of God and the Saviour of

"FOLD" AND "FLOCK." 127

the human race, but who have wandered away far from
the spouse, listen to our voice." I need not remind
you that the text of S. John, when correctly read and
justly considered, does not merely provide no basis for
the papal claim, but categorically prohibits it. The
unfortunate rendering of the Vulgate, which ignored the
significant change from auAr; in the first part of the
paragraph to TTOI/XKT/ in its final clause has been a prolific
root of error, and will for many generations yet confuse
and mislead the minds of believers. Let me quote the
well-known words in which a great Cambridge scholar,
who was also one of the greatest of Anglican divines
and bishops, has pointed out the gravity of the perver
sion thus inadvertently caused. I seize an occasion for
naming Bishop Westcott in order that I also, a
member of the sister university, may add one more
expression of homage and gratitude to the great volume
of witness which gathers about that holy and honoured
name.

" The translation ' fold ' for ' flock ' (pvile for grex} has
been most disastrous in idea and in influence. . . . The
change in the original from ' fold ' (ai-A?/) to ' flock '
(Trot/in?) is most striking, and reveals a new thought as
to the future relations of Jew and Gentile. Elsewhere
stress is laid upon their corporate union, and upon the
admission of the Gentiles to the holy city ; but here
the bond of fellowship is shown to lie in the common
relation to one Lord. The visible connexion of God
with Israel was a type and pledge of this original and
universal connexion. The unity of the church does
not spring out of the extension of the old kingdom, but

128 AN APPEAL FOR UNITY.

is the spiritual antitype of that earthly figure. Nothing
is said of one ' fold ' under the new dispensation.

" It may be added " (he continues) " that the oblitera
tion of this essential distinction between the ' fold ' and
the ' flock ' in many of the later western versions of this
passage indicates, as it appears, a tendency of Roman
Christianity, and has served in no small degree to con
firm and extend the false claims of the Roman see."

In his "Additional Note" Bishop Westcott expresses
the fear that " it would perhaps be impossible for any
correction now to do away with the effects which a
translation undeniably false has produced on popular
ecclesiastical ideas."

If proof were needed of the extraordinary hold which
the mistaken conception of ecclesiastical unity implied
in the Vulgate rendering has obtained on the minds of
our own contemporaries, I might, perhaps, point to a
curious and melancholy volume recently published, and
attracting in some quarters a large measure of attention.
This volume, which is commended to our notice by the
well-known ecclesiastic who presides over the Roman
Church in this country, professes to be a series of state
ments by " the more recent converts to the Catholic
faith " as to the reasons which induced them to take
the momentous step of changing their religious allegiance.
It is far from my purpose to censure any individual for a
proceeding which, however inexplicable to me, must be
assumed to have been dictated by a sense of religious
duty; but no man who volunteers his reasons for his
action can complain of their being criticised ; and I take
leave, therefore, to say generally that the most part of

FUTILITY OF PROSELYTISING. 129

the reasons alleged in this book seem to reflect the
dominating influence of that radical perversion as to the
character of ecclesiastical unity, which, supporting itself
on the unfortunate rendering of the Vulgate, has held
its ground from the fourth century until our own time,
and become the corner-stone of a vast fabric of eccle
siastical pretension. For the rest, this book moves me
to sympathize with Jeremy Taylor's protest against
proselytising in all its forms : " How few turn Lutherans,
or Calvinists, or Roman Catholics from the religion either
of their country or interest ! Possibly two or three weak
or interested, fantastic and easy, prejudicatc and effemi
nate understandings pass from church to church, upon
grounds as weak as those for which formerly they did
dissent ; and the same arguments are good or bad as
exterior accidents or interior appetites shall determine.
I deny not but, for great causes, some opinions are to
be quitted ; but when I consider how few do forsake
any, and when any do, oftentimes they choose the wrong
side, and they that lake the righter, do it so by contin
gency, and the advantage also is so little, I believe that
the triumphant persons have but small reason to please
themselves in gaining proselytes, since their purchase is
so small, and as inconsiderable to their triumph, as it is
unprofitable to them who change for the worse or for
the better upon unworthy motives. In all this there is
nothing certain, nothing noble. But he that follows the
work of God, that is, labours to gain souls, not to a sect
and a sub-division, but to the Christian religion, that is,
to the faith and obedience of the Lord Jesus, hath a
promise to be assisted and rewarded ; and all those that
G.U. K

i3o AN APPEAL FOR UNITY.

go to heaven are the purchase of such undertakings, the
fruit of such culture and labours ; for it is only a holy
life that lands us there." l

" They shall become one flock, one Shepherd." There
is no justification here for any ecclesiastical claim. The
unity of disciples will not be a quasi-political unity —
that is, an unity similar to that which exists in secular
associations. External tokens, which none can mistake,
will not mark off Christ's followers from the rest of
men, albeit to those whose vision is cleansed His
authenticating marks will be plain enough. You can
label " folds " conveniently, and you can, to that extent,
designate Christ's sheep, but He Himself denies in
advance the competence of all such designations. His
"flock" will be gathered from many "folds," when, at
length, "folds" shall be dispensed with, and He will
unite His own. So far our course is clear. We cannot
find in the text the prophecy of the historic Catholic
Church. The very mention of history calls us from the
delusive lights of ecclesiastical theory to the steady and
waxing illumination of experience. In the face of
Christian history who can continue to befool himself
with the dream of such a church as adorns the appeals
of proselytisers and moves the rhapsody of neophytes ?

" One in herself, not rent by schism, but sound,
Entire, one solid, shining diamond :
Not sparkles shatter'd into sects like you,
One is the Church and must be to be true ;
One central principle of unity.
As undivided, so from errors free,
As one in faith, so one in sanctity."

1 Dedication of The Life of Christ. Works, vol. ii., p. xii.,
Heber's ed.

THE TEST OF MORAL RESULTS. 131

History applies to ideas and institutions the one test
which Christ seems to authorise in the religious sphere,
the test of moral results.

" By their fruits ye shall know them. Do men gather
grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles ? Even so every
good tree bringeth forth good fruit ; but the corrupt
tree bringeth forth evil fruit." It has often astonished
me that the moral argument against the doctrine of a
politically united infallible church appears to weigh so
little with those who change their religious profession.
Trace that doctrine in history, and its condemnation lies
on the surface. When first I began my clerical life I
was brought much into contact with that popular
secularism with which the names of Charles Bradlaugh
and Mrs. Annie Besant were then commonly connected.
I thought then, and I think still, that the one effective
part of the secularist case was its challenge, on the basis
of historic fact, of the moral effects of ecclesiastical
Christianity. I have often tried, but never yet succeeded,
in stating a satisfactory explanation of such protracted
and frightful aberrations as, to give one notorious
example which was incessantly pressed on my attention,
religious persecution — an aberration, remember, which is
domesticated in the practice of almost all churches, and
established in the system of the greatest. Think of the
moral associations of familiar ecclesiastical names and
phrases. Make what allowance you will for the ignorance,
fanaticism, and interest which attach, in varying degree,
t<> the popular usage, and, even so, is it not full of
melancholy suggestion that the words coined in the
sanctuary should all carry to the general mind the

K 2

I32 AN APPEAL FOR UNITY.

suggestion of some distinctive moral defect ? Who can
/ wholly separate " priest " from craft, and " prelate " from
• pride, and " inquisitor " from cruelty, and " proselytiser "
from unscrupulous duplicity, and " casuistry " from
immoral subtleties, and the "confessional " from intoler
able suspicions ? But are not all these terms more or
less closely associated with that conception of the Church
as an earthly kingdom, with well-defined limits of juris
diction, and an exactly organized system of government,
which has been most consistently followed and most
completely realized within the Roman sphere? Is not
the root of the long series of historic scandals the sub
stitution of the notion of " one fold " for that of " one
flock " ?

" They shall become one flock, one shepherd." The
unity of disciples will not be essentially external and
political, yet it will be a force in the world which men
must recognize and reckon with. In His great prayer
before the Passion, Christ prayed for an unity which
would be the standing witness to the world of the truth
of His Divine claims. " Neither for these only do I
pray, but for them also that believe on Me through their
word, that they all may be one, even as Thou, Father,
art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be in Us ;
that the world may believe that Thou didst send Me."
Does Christian history afford any help to the inquirer,
who would fain learn in what sense the Saviour's prayer
has been answered ? Is there any recognizable unity of
disciples which is unshadowed by historic scandals,
which wakes no resentful memories, which provokes no
hostile criticism, but answers to the aspiration of the

INFLUENCE OF CHRIST. 133

Master, and arrests the attention of mankind, and
wins the homage of discipleship ? Upon the answer
to this question I apprehend that much depends. It
is indeed easy to show the spiritual failure of the
ecclesiastical system ; that sad testimony is writ large in
the laws and literature of Christendom. But if we must
stop there, if history is to yield no other witness, then it
would seem impossible to retain our faith in the power
of Christianity to redeem and regenerate society. I
believe that we are not shut up to this terrible conclu
sion. History, in decisively condemning the political
conception of the Catholic Church, does not drive us to
a total bankruptcy of faith. There has been operative
throughout the scandal-ridden centuries a subtle spiritual
force, which has unified believers, and attracted men to
discipleship. That force is the influence of Jesus Christ
Himself upon disciples, and through disciples upon the
mass of human life. There is an episode in the Gospel
which might seem prophetic of the course of Christian
history. The apostles were hot with a dispute about
precedence, and Christ rebuked them by taking in His
arms a little child and constituting him His true repre
sentative. " Whosoever shall receive one of such little
children in My name receiveth Me." Side by side
the world has always to reckon with these contrasted
missioners : the quarrelling hierarchy, greedy of place
and power, blind to the higher aspects of its own
ministry, dead to the best possibilities of its own life ;
and the child-like saints, who have drawn back from the
ignoble conflicts of ambition, and suffered Christ to
preach in them His silent but eloquent message of

i34 AN APPEAL FOR UNITY.

supernatural goodness. Let me give but one example,
sufficiently notorious. The student of Christian history
sees at one time the Borgia on the apostolic throne,
wallowing in the filth of his sensuality within the
sanctuary which he has made a sty, and Savonarola,
disillusioned, deserted, and undone, writing in the
intervals of reiterated tortures those meditations on
the 5 1st Psalm of which the piety and pathos have
moved men's consciences ever since, and even in our own
time have attracted the devout study of a distinguished
Cambridge scholar. In the moral sphere, age after age,
Christ's words have found fulfilment.

" They shall hear My voice, and they shall become
one flock, one Shepherd." A new thing has come to
pass on the earth : the Christian character has been cast
in the mould of the Gospel, and men everywhere have
confessed its beauty. The most intractable human
material has been found patient of Christ's workmanship ;
the most unkindly circumstances have not been able to
arrest or prohibit His work.

It was a common practice of the older church
historians to group their materials under certain broad
headings. Thus Neander deals with his periods in
three sections, of which the first treats of the external
history of the Church, the second with the development
of its constitution, the third with Christian life and
worship. It is only in the last that there is a coherent
and apparent unity. The relations of the Church and
the world are continually changing. The ecclesiastical
system has exhibited the common type of political
development, and indeed has followed the model of the

THE CHRISTIAN CHARACTER. 135

State with curious exactness. The only uniform feature
is the Christian character, with its inevitable expression
in the Christian life. And the reason lies here : the
Christian character is the creation of the personal
influence of Him who is the same yesterday, to-day, yea,
and for ever." The Christian life always exhibits the
same principles at work, and moves forward towards
the same moral ideal. They are the principles of the
life of Christ : the ideal is summed up in the classic
phrase, "Imitatio Christi." Let none object that this
moral unity, this unchanging Christ-likeness in character
and life, is a rhetorical figment, or a doubtful inference
from the Christian past, but not a plain and intelligible
token by which here and now men may recognize and
be led to Christ. On the contrary, it is the only " Note
of the Church," which really serves these necessary
ends. The one living Christian force among us is that
of the Christian character expressed in the Christian
life. Men are weary of theology ; they are contemptuous
of systems of discipline and worship ; a hundred tokens
show that they are deserting the churches, but they
never fail to welcome and yield to the influence of
Christian goodness. It matters strangely little what
you preach, or how you worship, if the people among
whom you work acknowledge in you that subtle, un
earthly power which S. Paul calls " the Spirit of
Jesus."

If you will permit me, I should like to put that before
you as a personal conviction, bred in me by fifteen years
of more or less close a h tact with the religious life of
English folk in the poorer p.irts of London. I can recall

136 AN APPEAL FOR UNITY.

the names of many, most widely differing in standpoint,
natural disposition, degree of education, methods of
work, religious doctrine and denomination, whom I have
observed winning the same success by the same moral
force. I am not, of course, suggesting that all systems
are equally sound, and all doctrines are equally true ;
but I am insisting on the fact that the one unity which
experience certifies, the one evidence of Christianity
which the general conscience owns, is not to be found in
anything external, but only in the personal influence of
Christian men. Christ's words to the seventy seem to
have evident application to all His disciples as they
move about their tasks in the world, and hold inter
course with their fellows in the manifold contacts of
society : " He that heareth you hcareth Me : and he
that rejecteth you rejecteth Me."

With these broad testimonies of Christian experience
in our minds — on the one hand, the decisive condemna
tion of the politically conceived Catholic Church, and,
on the other hand, the clear indication of moral
excellence as the one invariable and demonstrative
evidence of discipleship — we must face the ecclesiastical
situation of our own time, and reconsider our ecclesias
tical theory. The Christian society is seen to be
properly ministerial to discipleship. It is the divinely
ordained, divinely ordered instrument for bringing to bear
on men, as long as the world shall last, the regenerating
and educating influence of the living Christ. S. Paul is
not setting forth the case of a rigid hierarchical con
stitution, but declaring the essential purpose of the
Christian society as such, when he writes to the

PURPOSE OF THE CHURCH. 137

Kphesians his glowing description of the Church of
God : " And He gave some to be apostles ; and some
prophets ; and some evangelists ; and some pastors and
teachers ; for the perfecting of the saints, unto the work
of ministering, unto the building up of the body of
Christ : till we all attain unto the unity of the faith ; and
of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a full-grown
man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of
Christ." The Church answers to its purpose and
justifies its existence when it creates the Christian
character and inspires the Christian life. And these are
its title-deeds to allegiance, and its demonstrations of
origin. Where these are there is the Church, recogniz
able as such by the general conscience, and therefore
approaching men with unquestioned authority, and
receiving to its appeals the answering homage of their
hearts. Where these are not, there is nothing more
than the corpse of the Church. Christ Himself — let us
never forget it — plainly contemplated the possibility of
such spiritual death. His disciples, He said, were "the
salt of the earth," but the "salt" might lose its "savour"and
become worthless. "Occasions of stumbling" would come,
but "Woe to that man through whom they came ! " Con
stantly this warning note is audible throughout the
Gospel, and it is sustained in the Epistles. Evidently
we must reverse the common order. Instead of judging
Christians by the churches to which they belong, we
ought to judge the churches by the Christians they
produce. To societies not less than to individuals must
Christ's authorized test be applied.

I venture to submit with all deference to you that

138 AN APPEAL FOR UNITY.

the time has fully come for us to revise our formal eccle
siastical theory in deference to considerations which
unquestionably command the assent of our reason
and of our conscience. I am not likely to forget
that behind the existing divisions of the Christian
society lie long and complicated histories. There are
mountains of prejudice, unreason, bigotry, to overcome ;
mundane interests, as irrelevant as they are humili
ating, are strangely interwoven with religious questions.
Official self-importance in a hundred denominations is
in perpetual league against every approach to an unity
which could not fail to destroy many Stylites-pillars of
self-advertising piety. The bustling business men of
the churches, whose conception of spiritual success is
borrowed from the counting-house, and whose methods
of religious work are transplanted from the shop, will
probably resent the proposal to lift church life on to
a higher level than they know. It is much easier to
acquiesce in a working system, though to do so involve
the continued dominance of empty religious pretensions,
and the hollow affirmation of obsolete ecclesiastical
ideas. There is always a sphere for a good man's work,
and this is an imperfect world at best. The virtues of
good men, who accept and use the worn-out systems
of conventional religion are as the ivy growing on a
ruined tower, which makes beautiful a decay which it
neither arrests nor conceals. The primary need of the
hour is more religious honesty. In the classic phrase of
Dr. Johnson, Churchmen beyond all others need "to
clear their mind of cant." " Let love be without
hypocrisy " is the kindred protest of S. Paul.

THE EXISTING SITUATION. 139

Bear with me while I bring these considerations to
a very simple, indeed an obvious, application. On all
hands there is talk of Christian unity. Not a conference
or a congress of Churchmen meets without effusive
welcome from Nonconformists. A few weeks ago I sat
in the Congress Hall at Brighton and listened to a series
of speeches by prominent Nonconformists, all express
ing the warmest sentiments of Christian fraternity. I
reflected that by the existing law and current practice
of our Church all those excellent orators and their
fellow-believers were spiritual outcasts ; that, if they
presented themselves for the sacrament of unity, they
would be decisively rejected ; that, in no consecrated
building might their voices be heard from the pulpit,
though all men — as in the case of Dr. Dale, of Birming
ham — owned their conspicuous power and goodness.
The contradiction came home to my conscience as an
intolerable outrage ; and I determined to say here to
day, in this famous pulpit, to which your kindness has
bidden me, what I had long been thinking — that the
time has come for Churchmen to remove barriers for
which they can no longer plead political utility, and
which have behind them no sanctions in the best con
science and worthiest reason of our time. I remembered
that in my study, at work in preparation of the sermons
which expressed my obligation as a Christian teacher,
I drew no invidious distinctions. Baxter and Jeremy
Taylor, Dale and Gore, Ramsay and Lightfoot, Dollinger
and Hort, George Adam Smith and Driver, Ritschl and
Moberly, Fairbairn and Westcott, Bruce and Sanday,
Liddon and Lacordaire — these, and many others of all

140 AN APPEAL FOR UNITY.

Christian churches, united without difficulty in the
fellowship of sacred science. It was not otherwise in my
devotions. Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, Non
conformist were reconciled easily enough in the privacy
of prayer and meditation. The two persons whom I
venerated as the best Christians I knew, and to whom
spiritually I owed most, were not Anglicans. Only in
the sanctuary itself was the hideous discovery vouchsafed
that they were outcasts from my fellowship. I might
feed my mind with their wisdom, and kindle my
devotion with their piety, and stir my conscience with
their example, but I might not break bread with them
at the table of our common Lord, nor bear their
presence as teachers in the churches dedicated to His
worship. It seemed to me that the love so lavishly
expressed in that Congress Hall must, at least on our
side, be a strangely hollow thing. It is true that the
presiding Bishop reminded the Nonconformists that
there were doctrinal differences which could not be
forgotten or minimized ; but this obstacle was effectually
demolished by the debates of the congress — debates
which revealed the widest possible doctrinal divergence
between men who, none the less, communicated at the
same altars, and owned allegiance to the same church.

I submit that in the interest of our self-respect the
cruel and insulting contrasts which I have described
should cease, that we should at least receive to Holy
Communion those whom we hail with much ostentation
as our fellow-disciples, to many of whom we are under
such great spiritual obligations. Time was when the
refusal to communicate came not from the Church,

CHURCH REFORM. 141

but from the dissenters, and then the best Church
men exerted themselves to persuade their separated
brethren to unite with them in the sacrament of fellow
ship. It would seem that the obstacle to reunion is
now on our side, and that in spite of the fact that the
formal occasions of historic severance — doctrines more
speculative than essential, differences of ecclesiastical
order, objections as to the liturgy — have largely lost
their meaning. The air is full of projects of church
reform ; the demand for ecclesiastical autonomy is
commending itself as just to the multitudes whose
religious ardour is out of all proportion to their know
ledge or their sympathy. I wish I could persuade
myself that our reformers had realized the probable
consequences of the changes they advocate. For myself,
I am free to confess that I dread every change which
narrows the limits of the National Church by stricter
denominational organization. No reform, to my think
ing, deserves the name which does not tend to widen the
membership of the Church of England, and draw within
its pale all who, in S. Paul's phrase, " love our Lord
Jesus Christ in uncorruptness." Fraternity between
Christians which cannot express itself in a common
participation in the sacrament of unity is an empty
name. S. Paul's words about the Eucharist are a sug
gestive commentary on the prophecy of Christ : " We,
who are many, are one bread, one body, for we all
partake of the one bread." "They shall become one
flock, one Shepherd."

But here there is need of a caution. Our intolerance
is official, expressed in our system. Iis removal must

i42 AN APPEAL FOR UNITY.

be official also. I desire explicitly to repudiate the
suggestion that individual clergymen should, without
other authority than their own sense of right, break the
existing law. I would not have the sacred cause of
Christian unity stained and compromised by ecclesi
astical anarchy. My appeal is twofold. On the one
hand, I address myself to all those fellow-Churchmen,
lay and clerical, who feel the anomaly and scandal
involved in the present exclusiveness of the National
Church. I ask them to face the facts, to examine their
consciences, to discover their convictions, to speak out
their desires, and so to help towards the creation of a
public opinion on the matter. On the other hand, I
address myself with profound respect to their lordships
the bishops. I ask them to take in hand this blessed
task, to face this grave and solemn issue. They are the
constituted rulers of the National Church in spiritual
concerns. We revere them as, in no mere empty phrase,
our fathers in God. In the first instance, and in special
measure, this matter is in their hands. Let me remind
them that in the records of episcopal government in
this country there are illustrious precedents for the
policy I implore them to adopt. If the tradition of
Archbishop Leighton could at length replace that of
Archbishop Laud, how much might the episcopal
bench do, even at once, for the unification of Christ's
church ! And there is a nearer example. The late
lamented Bishop of London, whose historic studies
illuminated both Oxford and Cambridge, and gave
exceptional authority to his practical judgments, did
make a good beginning in this holy work, when he

ACTION OF THE BISHOPS. 143

declared his wish that Lutheran communicants should
be admitted to the Holy Communion without the
necessity of episcopal Confirmation. Why should not as
much be conceded in the case of Presbyterians, and the
members of the other organized and orthodox non-
episcopal churches ? But, I repeat, this is not a matter
for unauthorized individual action, but for the National
Church, acting constitutionally through the episcopate.

THE CHURCH VISIBLE AND INVISIBLE.

Preached on All Saints' Day, 1901, in Westminster Abbey.

1 HEARD THE NUMBER OF THEM WHICH WERE SEALED, A HUNDRED
AND FORTY AND FOUR THOUSAND, SEALED OUT OF EVERY TRIBE OF

THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. — Revelation vii. 4.

THE writer of the Apocalypse, whether S. John or
some other person, was clearly one whose mind was
saturated with the prophetic literature of ancient Israel.
He reproduces the thoughts and even the language of
the prophets, for these had grown to be the accustomed
furniture of his mind, the necessary forms in which his
ideas were clothed. He pictures the Church to himself
as the spiritual counterpart of Israel, and paints its
fortunes in word-pictures directly copied from the pages
of Israel's Scriptures. Thus the Church is always " the
New Jerusalem," and false Christian teachers are sham
Jews, " they which say they are Jews, and they are not,
but are a synagogue of Satan." The distinctive features
of the great description of the spiritual city — its strength
and beauty, its gates and foundations, its streets and
temple — are all plainly suggested by the dear and
familiar city on the Jewish hills. Such a description

LANGUAGE OF THE APOCALYPSE. 145

could hardly have been written after the destruction of
Jerusalem, or at least after the recollection of the city
had faded from living memory. The worship of the
triumphant church is evidently a transcript from the
splendid ceremonial of the Temple on Mount Zion.
Christ Himself is named in terms directly borrowed
from the Old Testament, " the Lion of the tribe of
Judah, the Root of David." Nor is it only in describing
the Church that the seer discovers an intensely Jewish
habit of mind. When he would speak of the great
oppressor of the church, he adopts the name of that
proud city, which stood in the annals of ancient Israel
as the very synonym of oppression. Imperial Rome, then
at the height of its blood-stained magnificence, bending
the almost limitless powers of its world-wide dominion
to the task of crushing Christianity, is described as a
harlot, bearing on her brow the legend, " Mystery,
Babylon the great, the mother of harlots and of the
abominations of the earth," and " drunken with the
blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs
of Jesus." Since thus the name Jerusalem has been
appropriated to the church, the actual city is referred to
under a significant periphrasis as "the great city which
spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also the
Lord was crucified." In the text, then, we have an
inspired description of the Christian Church. " I heard
the number of them which were sealed : a hundred and
forty and four thousand, sealed out of every tribe of the
children of Israel."

On All Saints' Day it cannot be untimely, and I hope
it will not prove unprofitable, to point you to an aspect

G.U. L

146 CHURCH VISIBLE AND INVISIBLE.

of the Church which is apt to fall into the background
of Christian thought when the course of experience
runs smoothly, but which comes into the forefront when
ever unkindly fortunes drive Christians back upon their
spiritual resources. Mostly we think and speak of the
Church as we read of it in the page of history, or as we
see it present before our eyes. We bewail its divisions,
we denounce its crimes, we tremble at its follies.
Side by side in eloquent contrast we set the sublime
declarations of the Scripture and the squalid facts. We
ask in fear, "Is this poor, distracted, scandal-ridden thing
the heir of the promises, the genuine progeny of the
apostles?" Does it indeed go forth on the path of its
destinies strong in the pledge of its Divine Founder that
against it " the gates of hell shall not prevail " ? It
seems that but one answer is possible, and that an
absolute and scornful negative. But there is another
standpoint, which as yet we may not gain, but which,
in mercy to our weakness, we are permitted to know.
The Church of history, the Church of our own observa
tions, the Church of the abuses which shock and the
conflicts which pain us — that Church, stained, divided,
defeated, has another aspect, on which the eyes o!
God are fixed, and on which the clear light of heaven
falls without shadow. Thus viewed, the envelope of
scandal which wraps the Church we see falls aside, and
the spiritual reality of its being stands revealed in order
and beauty beyond compare. The seer was uplifted
from the world, swept along by the spirit of Divine
ecstasy, that he might see the vision, and whisper the
sweet secret to his brethren. " I heard the number of

DIVINE VIEW OF THE CHURCH. 147

tin-in which were sealed, a hundred and forty and four
thousand, sealed out of every tribe of the children of
Israel." In the light of that fact the seer regards again
the tumultuous scene which faced him in the world,
and lo, on this also there has passed a high transfigura
tion. " After these things, I saw and beheld a great
multitude which no man could number, out of every
nation and of all tribes and peoples and tongues,
standing before the throne and before the Lamb,
arrayed in white robes and palms in their hands ;
and they cry with a great voice saying, Salvation
unto our God, which sitteth on the throne and unto
the Lamb."

The Church, then, as God sees it, as the seer
described it, is a multitude numbered and sealed. The
whole tale is complete ; every member is separately
known and marked. Of the whole body of disciples
Christ's word holds good : " I manifested Thy Name
unto the men Thou gavest Me out of the world : Thine
they were, and Thou gavest them to Me, and they have
kept Thy Word." Thus sharply and clearly in the
Gospel is the line drawn between the Church as God
knows and sees it and the world in the midst of which
the Church lives to witness, to suffer, and to work.
But the Church as men know and see it, the historic
society, with its terms of " Communion" and its hierarchy
of government, by no means corresponds with that
divinely-recognized body. There is an invisible Church
of which the historic society is at best but the symbol
and the representative, which must never even in thought
be too closely identified with it, which is God's secret

L 2

148 CHURCH VISIBLE AND INVISIBLE.

until the Judgment Day. Our Master taught us, by
many solemn and searching words, not to forget this,
not in our rashness and presumption to rebel against
it, not to anticipate the final severance which, in due
time, He Himself will make, by our futile, ignorant,
unrighteous decisions. How many dark pages would
never have darkened the record of Christianity, how
many fearful oppressions would have been averted, how
many obdurate stumbling-blocks would not now be
cumbering the way to God, if but Christians had remem
bered that the task of disentangling the good elements
from the bad, of rectifying ecclesiastical frontiers until
all the righteous are within, and all the unrighteous
without, the society of the Church, belongs to One
who will not delegate it to any mortal. To the
arrogance of the disciplinarian and the puritan He
says, " Nay ; lest haply while ye gather up the tares,
ye root up the wheat with them. Let both grow
together until the harvest." He knows His own. That
tangled scene where good and bad are mingled in
a confusion at once inextricable and scandalous never
screens for one instant from His eyes the crucial
distinction — " The firm foundation of God standeth,
having this seal : the Lord knoweth them that are
His."

In these days of strife and division we need these
warning words of Christ ; we need to chasten our
polemical ardour by the truth, so solemn and so search
ing, that polemics, even at their highest, move on a
lower platform than that where man meets God ; that
the true and final test of discipleship is not in the sphere

CHRISTIAN ASSURANCE. 149

of opinion, not even in that of formal belief, but always
and everywhere in the sphere of conscience. There, in
that solitude where no human eye observes nor human
ear listens, Christ, the lord of conscience, makes His
proposals to men, and receives their verdict on His
claims. He keeps His own church roll, and finds His
"jewels" in that day when He "makes up His treasure."
In the book of life He records the names of^His
elect.

" I heard the number of them which were sealed : a
hundred and forty and four thousand, sealed out of every
tribe of the children of Israel." And can we know, can
we in any measure have assurance, that on the roll of
All Saints our names also are inscribed ? We must ask
the question, Am I among that countless multitude
which God has exactly numbered, and which bears, in
every one separately, His authenticating seal ? There
is no arrogance in the question ; for we,^not less than the
illustrious heroes of Christian history, are "called to be
saints." The Gospel knows nothing of " counsels of
perfection" addressed to the members of a spiritual
aristocracy. Within the family of God one character
prevails, and one ideal is acknowledged. The noble
names of famous saints are not as demigods in a
heavenly court, beyond our hopes, but as the heralds
of a course, which we too must run. " Therefore let us
also, seeing we are compassed about with so great a
cloud of witnesses, lay aside every weight and the sin
which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with
patience the race that is set before us, looking unto
Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith." No doubt

150 CHURCH VISIBLE AND INVISIBLE.

there is a profound truth in those sad lines of our
Anglican poet :

"The gray-haired saint may fail at last,
The surest guide a wanderer prove.
Death only binds us fast
To the bright shore of love."

Yes ; we can never safely forget this ; we can never,
so long as we are on earth, give ourselves up to the
delusive sense of safety.

But even so, we are not wholly destitute of comfort ;
we are not altogether abandoned to the fearful fore
bodings and cruel anxieties which fill our minds when
we face seriously the problem of our eternal destiny.
We cannot read the New Testament without finding
there, everywhere latent, sometimes breaking through
the language of counsel or argument into exultant
declarations, the fact of religious certitude. It is
authorized by our Master in the Gospel; it is confessed
by His apostles in their writings. " Fear not, little
flock, it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the
kingdom." " In the world ye have tribulation ; but be
of good cheer : I have overcome the world." S. John
speaks of an interior certitude which is a trustworthy
pledge of final assurance. " Beloved, if our heart con
demn us not, we have boldness toward God " ; and
S. Paul leads on his logic to a climax in the triumphant
challenge, " Who shall separate us from the love of
Christ ? " Sixty generations of believers have subscribed
these apostolic declarations. The note of confidence
prevailing in the New Testament is everywhere audible

CONFIDENCE OF THE SAINTS. 151

in the lives of the saints. In that confidence there is no
trace of pride, no tincture of presumption, for it grows
out of a fact — out of the fact which coloured their lives
and made them saints, the fact of fellowship with the
Divine Master. This is the authenticating mark of all
saints, whether their names are inscribed on the calendars
of Christendom, and honoured with the public homage
of the Church, or have altogether perished from the
memory of mankind, and are known only to Him who
keeps the archives of time in His book of remembrance.
We can recognize that mark, and we know that it is the
peculium of no branch of the Visible Church, the special
distinction of no denomination of Christians. The
Christ-likeness reflecting the habit of fellowship with
Christ is God's token in the world, His silent, con
tinuous witness to men.

On All Saints' Day, then, we think of nothing which
separates or is in dispute. We forget controversy ;
we retire from conflict ; we see the Church, as that seer
in his vision saw it, in its Divine, eternal aspect, " the
whole company of faithful people dispersed throughout
the whole world "—yes, and not they only who, here
on earth, are militant in the Lord's battle, but they also,
not less, who have passed to their rest, and sleep in
Jesus. The mighty heroes of the Christian centuries; the
dear ones of personal experience ; the estranged in
external communion, who yet were one in heart and
obedience ; the unknown, who, in the shadows of
obscurity, under the frowns of a world which was not
worthy of them, yet "fought the good fight" and gained
the deathless crown ; the aged, passing to God with the

152 CHURCH VISIBLE AND INVISIBLE.

burden of their years upon them ; the vigorous, mysteri
ously called in the early maturity of their powers ; the
" babes in Christ," nearest and dearest of all to the Good
Shepherd's heart, who opened eyes on earth to close
them in death, and open them again in the garden of
God — all the saints are with us to-day, and join our
worship. God knows them all, and us also, who, at so
great a distance, are treading in their footsteps. " I
heard the number of them which were sealed : a hundred
and forty and four thousand, sealed out of every tribe of
the children of Israel."

CHRIST'S NEW COMMANDMENT.

Preached on the 12nd Sunday after Trinity, November yd, 1901,
in Westminster Abbey.

A NEW COMMANDMENT I GIVE UNTO YOU, THAT YE LOVE ONE

ANOTHER: EVEN AS i HAVE LOVED YOU, THAT YE ALSO LOVE ONE

ANOTHER. BY THIS SHALL ALL MEN KNOW THAT YE ARE MY
DISCIPLES, IF YE HAVE LOVE ONE TO ANOTHER. — S. John xiii.

34. 35-

AT the beginning of His ministry, in the Sermon on
the Mount, Christ had bidden His disciples love their
enemies : at the close of His ministry, in the final
discourse which preceded His Passion, He bade them
" love one another." In the earlier teaching He seems to
depreciate mutual love of friends, as if it implied no
extraordinary virtue — " If ye love them that love you,
what reward have ye ? do not even the publicans the
same ? " In the later teaching He exalts the mutual
love of disciples as the true counterpart of His own love,
and the standing witness to the world that His disciples
are verily what they claim to be. The explanation of
this apparently surprising difference lies, perhaps, partly
in the different occasion and immediate purpose of
Christ's speech, but mainly in the fact that between the
first teaching and the last His ministry in the world

154 CHRIST'S NEW COMMANDMENT.

had run its course, His object in that ministry had been
effected, the Church had come into existence, and therein
the instrument by which He designed to secure the ends
broadly sketched in the Sermon on the Mount. The
solemnity of the occasion of Christ's final discourse, and
the singularly impressive manner in which He declared
His mind, must have arrested the attention of the
Apostles, and cannot fail to attract the notice of every
devout student of the Gospel. S. John does not record
the institution of the Lord's Supper, which, at the time
when he wrote his reminiscences of the Master, had for
nearly two generations been the central and most solemn
institution of the Christian society ; but his narrative
makes perfectly plain that the discourses, which in his
own inimitable fashion, blending unconsciously his own
meditations with the treasures of his memory, the
ancient Apostle recorded were spoken in that upper
room on Maundy Thursday, in connexion with the
ordinance of the sacrament of Christ's Body and Blood.
The symbolic feet-washing, in which the Master had
rendered to His disciples the lowliest offices of menial
service, had just taken place, and the heart-piercing
appeal was yet ringing in their ears — "Ye call Me
Master, and Lord ; and ye say well, for so I am. If I
then, the Lord and the Master, have washed your feet,
ye also ought to wash one another's feet. For I have
given you an example, that ye also should do as I have
done to you." That dreadful episode had followed in
which the grief-laden Master, whispering the sad so i< t
of treason, there present at the table, had made His last
approach to the traitor's heart, had spoken that dark

THE CHURCH IN HISTORY. 155

word of dismissal — " That thou doest, do quickly" — and
had seen the door close for ever on "the son of perdition."
Then was the time when Jesus Christ, relieved of the
presence of Judas Iscariot, recovered His habitual calm,
and thus addressed His followers : "Little children, yet
a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek Me : and as
I said unto the Jews, Whither I go ye cannot come: so
now I say unto you. A new commandment I give unto
you, that ye love one another: even as I have loved you,
that ye also love one another. By this shall all men
know that ye are My disciples, if ye have love one to
another."

The Gospel contains very few commandments of
Christ. His Church had no "paper constitution"; its
fundamental law was well described by S. James as " a
law of liberty." For the unifying principle would not
be obedience to unalterable statute, but free, loving
discipleship to a living Master. Yet the Church would
take rank as an organised polity in the movement of
human civilisation ; its primitive and essential unity
would be buried from view by more obvious, cogent,
generally intelligible, bonds of cohesion ; it would have
a political development of its own, curiously similar to
the normal political development of mundane societies.
Therefore, it would happen that the highest truth of
ecclesiastical life would tend to be obscured, and,
indeed, to fade wholly from Christian minds. Notes of
the true Church would be declared, and offered for the
guidance of a doubtful and perplexed humanity, and
as the ages passed, each one leaving behind some dis
tinctive legacy of confusion and scandal, these arbitrary

156 CHRIST'S NEW COMMANDMENT.

tokens would be more and more insisted upon. Men
would be summoned to accept as the essential character
of Christ's Church some scheme of theology subtly
articulated, and on all sides sheathed in the brazen
armour of anathema, or some hierarchical constitution
built on the rock of Divine right and endowed with the
mystic powers and graces necessary for the religious life.
Orthodoxies and hierarchies have played a great part in
the history of Christianity, and the day is yet far distant
when they will cease to play a great part. But the
human spirit has always chafed under their dominance,
and cried out for some better authentications of Christi
anity than they can offer. I misread altogether the
signs of our time if that age-long protest is not now
revealed by many pathetic and eloquent tokens.
Religion cannot be made to hang on some tiresome
antiquarian research into hierarchical pedigrees ; eternal
issues cannot be made to depend on an impossible
intellectual agreement. Hierarchies and creeds may
serve a useful purpose, and wield an authority very just
and serviceable within certain practical limits; but both
the one and the other are time-born, coloured by
circumstance, and shaped by contingency, changing
therefore from age to age, reflecting a thousand irrelevant
influences ; the essential and eternal truth may not be
recognized in them. Men are appealing to an older
authority ; they are going behind the conflicting claims
of systems and churches, and insisting on some clear
guidance from the Master Himself. And they do not
appeal in vain. Christ gives the longed-for sign. He
authorizes one note of His Church, and empowers men

THE PRAYER OF CHRIST. 157

to seek the assurance of His presence by an intelligible
token. "A new commandment I give unto you, that
ye love one another : even as I have loved you, that ye
also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye
are My disciples, if ye have love one to another." The
mutual love of disciples, inspired by and modelled on
the love of Christ for them, expressing itself therefore
in manifold and unselfish service, is the one note of the
Church which Christ Himself certifies. It is the principle
of that unity of all disciples for which He prayed, and
which he designed to be the standing evidence to the
world of His own Divine mission. The words of
Christ's prayer ring in Christian ears as a solemn
rebuke, a deep and pathetic protest. In the octave of
All Saints, when our thoughts move out beyond con
ventional frontiers, and range at will over the whole
expanse of sacred history, we may well recall the aspira
tions of the Redeemer : " Neither for these only do I
pray, but for them also that believe on Me through their
word ; that they may all be one : even as Thou, Father,
art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be in us :
that the world may believe that Thou didst send Me."

Our Master, as I reminded you, had just instituted
the sacrament of the Holy Communion. His words
interpret, and are interpreted by, that sacred ordinance.
The universal conscience and practice of mankind read
into the physical acts of common eating and common
drinking a certain moral significance. To eat and drink
together implies the covenant of mutual friendship, and
declares it publicly. The rudest savage confesses in this
communion a sacramental efficacy, which he can only

CHRIST'S NEW COMMANDMENT.

forget at the cost of heinous guilt. This primitive faith
survives even in the cynical and frivolous mind of the
civilised man. He too respects a certain moral obliga
tion suggested and secured by fellowship in the covenant
of hospitality. Christ builds His sacrament on the sub
structure of this universal piety ; but He raises and
enriches it by a personal association. The bread broken
in His consecrating hands and the Wine poured forth
in His chalice are charged with a tender and deathless
memory, and receive commission to yield an everlasting
witness. Christian fellowship is to be expressed in a
sacramental feast, which itself is inseparable in origin
and idea from that death on the cross which was the
supreme exhibition of the love of Christ.

There are other and not less important aspects of
Holy Communion with which I have no present concern ;
but these lie on the surface, and were paramount in
the apostolic age. The two related truths are affirmed
by S. Paul in the earliest record of eucharistic doctrine
which we possess : on the one hand, the assertion of
Christian unity — " We, who are many, are one bread,
one body; for we all partake of the one bread"; on
the other hand, the perpetual proclamation of that death
of Christ which gives life to the world — " As often as ye
eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye proclaim the Lord's
death till He come."

It may well arrest our attention that the love which
Christ ordains to be the public attestation of disciple-
ship is not an universal sentiment of philanthropy,
but a domestic affection — the love of disciples for one
another. We are very familiar with the one ; we are

COSMOPOLITANISM. 159

almost as unfamiliar with the other. But Christ knew
human nature when He imposed His "new command
ment." He knew that limitation of direct responsibility
and recognition of specific obligations are the conditions
of operative charity. Cosmopolitanism may inspire most
admirable rhetoric, but it does not, as a fact of experi
ence, move men to acts of self-sacrificing service. The
Stoics of antiquity professed the most generous doctrines ;
but they acquiesced without difficulty in the brutal
practice of pagan society. It is possible to find in the
writings of Seneca and Epictetus very striking parallels
to the altruistic teachings of Christianity ; but when we
pass from theory to conduct the gulf between the two
systems is apparent. The Stoic had no recognised
sphere in which to apply his theories. " His avowal of
cosmopolitan principles, his tenet of religious equality,
became inoperative, because the springs of sympathy,
which alone could make them effective, had been frozen
at their source. Where enthusiasm is a weakness, and
love a delusion, such professions must necessarily be
empty verbiage. The temper of stoicism was essentially
aristocratic and exclusive in religion, as it was in politics.
While professing the largest comprehension, it was
practically the narrowest of all philosophical castes." l
The same moral was pointed by the course of that
resuscitated paganism which gave so distinctive and
unpleasing an aspect to the French Revolution. The
kindly traditions of family and neighbourhood, those
local and personal loyalties which are the true springs

1 Vide Bishop Lightfoot : S. Paul and Seneca, in rhilippians,
p. 322.

ifio CHRIST'S NEW COMMANDMENT.

of genuine patriotism, withered and died before the pre
tentious doctrines of an universal philanthropy ; and to
this day civic hatreds are nowhere so fierce and
irrational as under the official proclamation of ' Liberty,
Equality, and Fraternity.' "

Theoretical charity can only become practically
serviceable by being disciplined in the school of actual
sacrifice ; and, therefore, the interest of mankind requires
the fraternity of Christians. The Church is designed to
be an object-lesson to the world, as well as a school of
character and a sphere for the exercise of charity. In
the midst of disordered society, as it moves on the low
plane of economic development, exhibiting in unrelieved
repulsiveness the free play of selfish passions, the fierce
and ruthless war of rival claims and interests, Christ
has ordained that men shall have always before them the
spectacle of regenerated society, in which the low, greedy
instincts of human nature are bridled and conquered by
the law of a common relationship ; where human character
grows under the silent, secret influence of a Divine per
sonality towards one supreme and perfect model ; where
all the powers of human nature are discovered, developed,
drawn into action, under the contagion and coercion, of
one Divine example ; where liberty should express itself
in order, and order minister always to liberty ; where the
completeness of self-development should be the con
sequence of utter self-surrender in service — where, in fine,
a harmony should unite the interests of the individual
and those of the society which claims him. Thus the
Church would realize the ideal of the State, and interpret
the aspirations of humanity. In an undone and distracted

THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 161

world it would be " «i city set on a hill," a beacon
kindled by the hand of God, the promise, the pledge, the
prophecy, of all the good that men have dared to hope
for, or found courage to attempt.

The Church comes forth from its Founder to enter on
its faithful progress through history with this message
to deliver, with this claim to advance, with this
character to maintain. All the world must take
account of Christ's " new commandment," for it
provides the standing evidence of His presence in the
Church which bears His name, and professes to con
tinue His ministry. " A new commandment give I
unto you, that ye love one another, even as I have
loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall
all men know that ye are My disciples, if ye have love
one to another." In the first age of the Church the
critical importance of the mutual love of Christians was
recognized. S.Jerome preserves an anecdote of S.John
which admirably illustrates this fact. In his last days,
when he had to be carried into church, and was too old
to speak for any length of time, the apostle used in
addressing the congregation to repeat simply the old
commandment, which yet is, indeed, always new,
" Little children, love one another." Then, as ever
since, Christians were impatient of that teaching. His
disciples, weary of the continual repetition, asked why
he always said this. " Because," he replied, " it is the
Lord's commandment : and if it only be fulfilled, it is
enough." Tertullian, in a famous passage of his
"Apology," describes the impression made on the
heathen by the mutual love of believers. They could

G.U. M

i6a CHRIST'S NEW COMMANDMENT.

not understand it, and tried to explain it away on base
assumptions, but too easy to their depraved habits.
" ' See,' say they, ' how they love each other ! ' for they
themselves hate each other. ' And see how ready they
are to die for each other ! ' for they themselves are more
ready to slay each other."1

Two centuries later than Tertullian a still more
illustrious Christian — Chrysostom — describes the scandal
caused to the heathen by the lovelessness of believers.
His language is on many grounds very remarkable,
and singularly apposite to the conditions of the modern
Church. He is commenting on Christ's " new com
mandment," and the testimony which by obeying it
Christians are to deliver to the world ; and, after his
practice, he [draws on his intimate knowledge of the
religious life of his time in order to illustrate the sacred
text, and to press home on his hearers its practical
lessons. "Miracles," he says, "do not so much attract
the heathen as the mode of life ; and nothing so much
causes a right life as love. . . . And with good reason.
When one of them sees the greedy man, the plunderer,
exhorting others to do the contrary, when he sees the
man who was commanded to love even his enemies
treating his very kindred like brutes, he will say that the
words are folly. . . . We, we are the cause of their
remaining in error. Their own doctrines they have long
condemned, and in like manner they admire ours, but
they are hindered by our mode of life." S. Chrysostom
goes on to say that it is vain to point out to the
disgusted heathen the virtues of famous Christians of
1 Vide Apology, vol. i., p. 39.

SCANDAL OF DISUNION. 163

former times. About them they are sceptical so long
as the Christians whom they see and know are
scandalously unworthy of their profession. " Where
fore," he concludes, " I fear lest some grievous thing
come to pass, and we draw down upon us heavy
vengeance from God."1 What was true of the heathen
multitude of Antioch at the end of the fourth century
is not less true of the non-Christian multitudes 01
Europe at the beginning of the twentieth century.
S. Chrysostom's terrible confession ought to be printed
on every Christian's mind, and pressed home to every
Christian's conscience : " We, we are the cause of their
remaining in their error." In the octave of All Saints,
when, with the Christian centuries before our eyes, we
consider Christ's " new commandment," we are over
whelmed with shame and perplexity. " I will tell you
plainly," said Maurice, " I find far greater difficulty in
this commandment than in all the rest of the discourse.
The Church has been trying to construe it for eighteen
hundred years, and has succeeded miserably ill."8

Bear with me while I base on my sermon an earnest
and affectionate appeal. Here in England, as we all
acknowledge, our unhappy divisions are a sore scandal
and an abiding stumbling-block. Must they continue
for ever? Is a decent regret the whole of our duty with
respect to them ? Can we, members of the Church of
England, do nothing, here and now, to remove the causes
of historic separations, to mitigate the bitternessof ancient
feuds, to recover touch with long-parted brethren, to

1 Horn. Ixxii., on S. John xiii. 35.
4 Vide Gospel of S. John, p. 363.

M 2

164 CHRIST'S NEW COMMANDMENT.

vindicate before a justly scornful, justly sceptical nation
the fraternity of disciples ? We are well used to genial
and kindly speech ; it is the fashion of our time, the
courteous cant of a soft-mannered society ; but what is it
practically worth so long as we hold firmly to a theory
and a discipline which put us out of fellowship with all
the reformed Churches ? Remember that our Divine
Lord appointed the Holy Communion to be the symbol
and the sustenance of Christian fraternity. No pro
fessions of mutual love are worth anything so long as
they are consistent with a deliberate and sustained
refusal to join in that sacrament of fellowship. Has not
the time fully come when we should ask, in all earnest
ness, whether the spiritual isolation of the Church of
England can be sustained by valid and sufficient
reasons ? For my part I declare to you solemnly that I
have come to think that the frank recognition of the
ordered and orthodox Protestant Churches is demanded
of us by irresistible considerations of reason, of prudence,
and of religion. Difficulties there are unquestionably in
the way of so great a departure from the long-established
tradition of Anglican cxclusiveness; but I cannot and
will not believe that, when once the duty is seen, the
practical obstacles will be found insurmountable. In
any case I have cleared my conscience and chosen my
course. Here that choice is fitly declared. For West
minster Abbey is no merely denominational temple ;
it is designated by Providence to be the temple of
Christian concord. Here the great Church beyond the
Tweed received its Westminster Confession ; here the
scholars of the English-speaking Churches combined in

WITNESS OF THE ABBEY. 165

the long labour of revising the English Bible. Within
these walls are gathered memorials of illustrious Non
conformists ; and choir and clergy, as they pass to their
daily worship, tread the stone which bears the honoured
name of the Independent, Livingstone. "So long as
Westminster Abbey " — I am borrowing the language of
one whose memory is dear and fragrant in this place,
Dean Stanley — " maintains its hold on the affections and
respect of the English Church and nation, so long will
it remain a standing proof that there is in the truest
feelings of human nature, and in the noblest aspirations
of religion, something deeper and broader than the
partial judgments of the day and the technical distinc
tions of sects — even than the just, though it may for
the moment be misplaced, indignation against the errors
and sins of our brethren." 1

Here then, by an indisputable right, and with obvious
fitness, I ask you to think on these things, to search
your conscience, to apply your understanding, to criticize
your prejudices in the light of Christ's word and
example, to speak with your fellow-Churchmen, to seek
guidance from the Source of all wisdom, and so to
create, as far as you can, an honest and courageous
public opinion within the Church — that Church which
carries always on its front this solemn, searching charge:
"A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love
one another ; even as I have loved you, that ye also love
one another. By this shall all men know that ye are
My disciples, if ye have love one to another."

1 Memorials of Westminster^ p. 354.

CHRIST'S MISSION IN THE CHURCH.

Preached on the "iyd Sunday after Trinity (N<n>. lo///), 1901,
on behalf of the East London Church Fund, in Westminster Abbey.

AND JESUS WENT ABOUT ALL THE CITIES AND THE VILLAGES,
TEACHING IN THEIR SYNAGOGUES, AND PREACHING THE GOSPEL OF
THE KINGDOM, AND HEALING ALL MANNER OF DISEASE AND ALL
MANNER OF SICKNESS. BUT WHEN HE SAW THE MULTITUDES, HE
WAS MOVED WITH COMPASSION FOR THEM, BECAUSE THEY WERE
DISTRESSED AND SCATTERED, AS SHEEP NOT HAVING A SHEPHERD.
THEN SAITH HE UNTO HIS DISCIPLES, THE HARVEST TRULY IS PLEN
TEOUS, BUT THE LABOURERS ARE FEW. PRAY YE THEREFORE THE
LORD OF THE HARVEST, THAT HE SEND FORTH LABOURERS INTO HIS
HARVEST. AND HE CALLED UNTO HIM HIS TWELVE DISCIPLES, AND
GAVE THEM AUTHORITY OVER UNCLEAN SPIRITS, TO CAST THEM OUT,
AND TO HEAL ALL MANNER OF DISEASE AND ALL MANNER OF SICK
NESS. — 5. Matthew ix. 35 ; x. i.

THE Gospel is not only the charter of the Christian
society, but also the authoritative statement of its pur
pose and work. The Church builds its spiritual claim
on the recorded commission of a Divine founder, and
recognizes its duty in His recorded example. Would
we know the intention with which the Church exists in
the world, the nature of the witness it is charged to bear
to the generations as they succeed one another on the

RANGE OF CHRIST'S MINISTRY. 167

stage of history, the quality of the influence it is to
bring upon human life as it moves slowly forward in
a perpetual but intermittent and various development,
and the range of its activity in the mass of human
society ? We must find the answers to all these
questions in those brief narratives which record the
earthly life of Jesus Christ. The intention of that life
is carried on to the life of the society of His disciples ;
His witness is renewed from age to age in the witness of
the Church ; the quality of His influence is properly the
same as that of its influence ; the range of its activity is
the range of His. Christ's ministry is described by the
evangelists in precisely the same terms as those in
which they describe the ministry of His disciples. He
preached "the gospel of the kingdom"; so did they. He
" healed all manner of disease and all manner of sickness" ;
on them He bestowed authority and commission to do
the same. Everywhere He " cast out devils " ; they were
empowered and commanded to do as much. Christ
was at great pains to make clear to them the essential
identity of their mission with His own. " He that
heareth you, heareth Me," He said to the seventy, " and
he that rejecteth you, rejecteth Me." So great was their
authority ! He pressed on them that inasmuch as their
mission was also His, so must its loyal fulfilment involve
them in similar worldly fortunes. Let them be on their
guard against the kind of success which their powers
would easily secure, and which would impair the
eloquent likeness between Himself and them. "A dis
ciple is not above his master, nor a servant above his
lord. It is enough for the disciple that he be as his

1 68 CHRIST'S MISSION IN THE CHURCH.

master, and the servant as his lord. If they have called
the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall
they call them of his household ? "

The famous legend, which, on the eve of S. Martin's
festival, I may be pardoned for recalling, is clearly
inspired by the conviction that there must be a corre
spondence between the outward aspect and fortunes of
genuine Christians and those of Christ. Sulpicius
Severus relates that the Evil One appeared to Martin
clad in royal robes and with a diadem, and asked for the
homage due to Christ. Martin's spiritual instinct, un
deceived, declined to acknowledge him, and, when
rebuked, he replied that it was not in that guise that he
looked for Christ, but with the show of the wounds of
the cross. Cardinal Newman's comment on this story
is equally beautiful and suggestive. " I suppose it
means in this day that Christ comes not in pride of
intellect or reputation for philosophy. These are the
glittering robes in which Satan is now arraying.
Many spirits are abroad ; more are issuing from the pit :
the credentials which they display are the precious gifts
of mind, beauty, richness, depth, originality. Christian,
look hard at them, with Martin, in silence, and ask them
for the print of the nails."1

S. John relates that on Easter evening the risen
Christ appeared to the disciples, and laid on them a
solemn charge, using words which declared the per
petuation of His mission in them : " As the Father
hath sent Me, even so send I you." Now, Christ's

1 Vide Dictionary of Christian Biography, vol. iii., p. 844, where
this quotation is made.

RANGE OF CHRIST'S MINISTRY. 169

mission, as revealed in His conduct, had a range
co-extensive with human life. " The Son of God was
manifested that He might destroy the works of the
devil," and those " works " were apparent not only
in the spiritual and moral spheres, but also in the
physical sphere. All the various misery of mankind, in
all its strange ramifications, under all its wonderful
disguises, came within the reach of Christ's redemptive
action ; in the last analysis the cruel, complex burden
of an undone race had its origin in moral revolt ; and,
though this or that specific calamity might not rightly
be connected with individual fault, yet the broad truth
remained, the spring of all human wretchedness lay deep
in the darkness of sin, and he who would be the world's
comforter must first be its physician ; he who would
re-create society must first redeem man. Christ's
redemptive mission, reaching down to the hidden roots
of misery, and embracing all its developments — political,
social, intellectual, physical — is the mission of His
Church. His word to His disciples is still the same :
" We must work the works of Him that sent Me, while
it is day : the night cometh when no man can work."
But we must turn from theory to practice, from the
sacred pages, from which shines unfailingly the tranquil
glory of the world's Redeemer, to the soiled records of
Christian experience. To-day we must be sternly,
relentlessly practical, for we are confronted once more
with an urgent and neglected duty.

East London, as we use the term in the pulpit, is less
a geographical than an ethical and social term. It
includes all that mass of congregated city folk who live,

170 CHRIST'S MISSION IN THE CHURCH.

broadly, under the same conditions ; who are manual
workers, skilled or unskilled ; who are separated by a
wide and, I fear, a widening gulf from the comfortable
and cultivated sections of the people; who live in chronic
anxiety lest by some economic crisis their employment
shall suddenly fail, and with it their means of living and
the securities of their civic self-respect ; who are, in many
cases, exposed to grave risks of life and limb, and whose
normal length of years is considerably less than that of
the classes above them in the order of society. This
vast multitude of people, numbering, perhaps, if we
include, as for my argument we are bound to do, the
inhabitants of South London, and of London over the
border, as well as those of East London — some three
millions of souls — is for the most part a very recent and
a very artificial aggregation. Seen from the outside by
a superficial observer, it has an aspect of depressing
sameness : everything seems to proceed on a dead-level
of monotonous and rather squalid activity ; but seen
from within, the effect on the observer is rather that of
an astonishing and, so to say, wilful variety. The law
of social aggregation which accumulates these vast
multitudes works together with a law of social segrega
tion which isolates class from class, trade from trade,
interest from interest, nationality from nationality, creed
from creed. There is a principle of caste which pene
trates society from one end to the other, neutralizing the
kindly influences of neighbourhood, and stereotyping
the prejudices of men. At the bottom of society there
is a lamentable collection of human wreckage, the
"jetsam and flotsam" of the social sea, carried by its

EAST LONDON. 171

winds and tides to the harbourage of the great city.
One of the most cautious and careful of our social
students, Mr. Charles Booth, to whose patient and
devoted labour we are all greatly indebted, has described
this bottommost class in the hierarchy of London life :
" Their life is the life of savages, with vicissitudes of
extreme hardship and occasional excess. . . . From
these come the battered figures who slouch through the
street, and play the beggar or the bully, or help to
foul the record of the unemployed ; these are the worst
class of corner men, who hang round the doors of public-
houses ; the young men who spring forward on any
chance to earn a copper; the ready materials for disorder
when occasion serves. They render no useful service ;
they create no wealth ; more often they destroy it.
They degrade whatever they touch, and as individuals
are perhaps incapable of improvement. They may be to
some extent a necessary evil in every large city ; but
their numbers will be affected by the economical con
dition of the classes above them, and the discretion of
' the charitable world' ; their way of life by the pressure
of police supervision." 1

This class of hereditary outcasts is continually fed
from above. Every variety of failure in the superior
classes of society tends to find its way to this Alsatia of
the worthless. Drink, vice, misfortune, crime, are the
recruiting sergeants of that doomed host. The only
effectual way of dealing with this scandal and problem
of our irrcformable class is by arresting the stream of
recruits from the classes above it. East London needs
1 Vide Life and Labour of the People, vol. i., p. 38.

172 CHRIST'S MISSION IN THE CHURCH.

an arrestive agency, ubiquitous, ever-active, resourceful,
which shall come between drink, vice, misfortune, crime,
and the social abyss towards which their victims are
inexorably carried. The higher you go in the hierarchy
of life the more the individual counts for, the more
amenable he is to agencies of reformation. You are not
neglecting the criminal residuum when you bend your
principal efforts to the rescue of those who are drifting
into it.

East London, as every great aggregation of men,
contains within it a multitude of morally broken folk,
men and women who have lost heart and lost character,
and who, if they are to escape an utter bankruptcy of
their lives, need some regenerating, re-creating force
which shall quicken and recover them. East London,
when all is said, is an unkindly soil for the best things
to grow in. Life is dull, toilsome, prosaic, even squalid.
It is not favourable to the development of character ; it
is bad for the up-bringing of children. I notice that
even our devoted clergy, who will certainly endure any
personal hardships which their duty demands, eagerly
seize the opportunity to desert the East End when their
children begin to grow up. There is urgent need, then, of
some inspiring, elevating influence which shall encourage
men to resist the impressions of their environment, to rise
above the traditions of society, and to move morally and
spiritually towards worthier ideals than any native to
their neighbourhood. East London wants discipline
and unity. Into its bewildering movement there come
continually, not in hundreds but in thousands, the
immigrants from the country. They arc drawn to the

EAST LONDON. 173

great city by many forces, some known, some but dimly
suspected. They come in the ardour of youthful hope,
with youth's keen curiosity and fierce thirst for pleasure,
and, we must add, with youth's perilous self-confidence
and inevitable ignorance. They leave behind them in
their ancestral villages the normal disciplines of life —
home, and the kindly interest of neighbours, and the
salutary deference for social superiors. At an age when
these protective disciplines are most needed they are
suddenly withdrawn. In this terrible city these exiles
from home arc amid strangers ; they must make for
themselves some substitute for all they have lost. Is it
any marvel that in multitudes of cases they fall under
the novel and exigent strain of their circumstances ? I
am speaking to those who can fill in the outlines of my
speech from the resources of their own knowledge. You
know how many a bright lad, many a pure maiden, the
hope and pride of some simple rustic home, for whom
parental prayers rise daily to the Eternal Father,
about whom are gathered the tenderest love of mothers'
hearts, are brought to destruction here. Caught up
by the eager, multitudinous life of London, carried
along by its depraved fashions, deluded by its base
sophistries, deserted by its cynical indifference, what
hope is there for them if there be not present and
active in the scenes of peril an energy of discipline, of
restoration, and of hope ? East London, I said, is
inwardly divided. Those multitudes are gathered into
sections and parties, which are mutually ignorant, and
therefore suspicious and hostile. There is no cohesion,
because there is no confidence ; and there is no

174 CHRIST'S MISSION IN THE CHURCH.

confidence because there is no common enthusiasm, no
common sympathy. The social reformer laments, as
the rock on which his benevolent projects are broken,
this inveterate incoherence of our poorer people. There
is need of some strong, patient, persistent force which
shall make war against ignorance, which shall create
confidence, which shall make cohesion possible, and thus
provide the conditions of social regeneration.

Consider, I pray you, these grave and apparent
necessities of city life. Arrestive agencies to intercept
the falling ; regenerating agencies to rescue and renew
the fallen ; disciplinary agencies to protect and order the
incoming strangers ; inspiring agencies to move men to
break through the iron restraints of routine and rise
above the demoralizing dulness of uncultured society ;
unifying agencies to discover some latent principle of
common action, and to bind together the segregated
sections of the community — where shall these blessed
powers be found ? At least we can be in no doubt
where we, as disciples of Jesus Christ, were directed to
find them. We turn to the Gospel and contemplate the
Son of God, as He reviews the mingled life of sin-
stricken humanity, and takes action to redeem it.
" When He saw the multitudes, He was moved with
compassion for them, because they were distressed and
scattered, as sheep not having a shepherd." Is not that
a just and pathetic description of our modern society ?
Would not Christ speak thus of our great city ? Mark,
then, His action. From the eloquent spectacle of human
disorder and distress, He turns to His disciples, and
constitutes them a commissioned Church. " Then saith

EPISTLE TO DIOGNETUS. 175

He unto His disciples, The harvest truly is plenteous,
but the labourers are few. Pray ye, therefore, the Lord
of the harvest, that He send forth labourers unto His
harvest." Immediately the evangelist records that
solemn and momentous act from which the Christian
Church has proceeded : " He called unto Him His
twelve disciples, and gave them authority over unclean
spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of
disease and all manner of sickness." East London
needs the Church of Christ.

Somewhere near the middle of the second century of
our era an anonymous Christian thinker wrote a short
apology for Christianity, which scholars know as "the
Epistle to Diognetus." In this writing the Church is
described as the " soul " of the world. " The soul is
enclosed in the body, and yet itself holdeth the body
together; so Christians are kept in the world as in a
prison-house, and yet they themselves hold the world
together." l

" They themselves hold the world together." I
cannot find a truer or more striking description of the
influence of the Church on the mass of human society.
The significant metaphors by which Christ indicated
the character and effect of His Church point in the
same direction. In the corrupting carcase of a dying
world Christians will be as " the salt " — restorative,
preserving, salutary. In the darkness of suspicion and
error Christians will be as "the light" — bringing
security, guidance, and joy. Amid the panic and peril
of distracted humanity Christians will be as " the city
1 Vide Ep. ad Diogn., c. 6.

176 CHRIST'S MISSION IN THE CHURCH.

set on a hill, which cannot be hid." Such was Christ's
plan ; and, if it must be confessed that the success which
has attended it is poor and partial, it is obvious that the
cause of comparative failure lies in the fact that Christ's
plan has been misunderstood, and, in great measure,
abandoned. The Church, too often, has accepted the
principles and methods of the world, instead of impress
ing its own principles and methods on the world.
Instead of unifying divided society, it has, too often,
added a spurious consecration to its divisions, and
poured into them the embittering poison of religious
fanaticism.

The Master's word rings in our ears to-day as we face
the alienated multitudes of Christendom : " Woe unto
the world because of occasions of stumbling ! for it must
needs be that the occasions come ; but woe to that man
through whom the occasion cometh ! "

Yes, we cannot think without bitter shame of all we
might be, and are not, in East London ; yet, in spite of
all scandals, even of this chronic and baleful stumbling-
block of our unhappy and unnecessary divisions, the
Church of Christ nowhere more plainly justifies its name
than in those poor and crowded districts. I believe, more
strongly than ever, in the value of the work carried on
year in and year out by the clergy of the National Church
in East London. That work is easily misjudged and
underrated by casual and prejudiced observers ; but no
one who really knows the facts will think meanly of it.
Grant that the churches are not crowded, that in many
parishes they are nearly empty ; does that fact prove
that the Church is powerless and worthless ? No one

CLERGY IN EAST LONDON. 177

who knows East London from inside will think so. In
the life of that district three persons, clothed with the
authority of the State itself, move and work among the
people with an influence and an effect which are almost
infinitely precious. The doctor, the schoolmaster, and
the clergyman represent the paternal aspect of govern
ment on its gentler side, and all three are loved and re
spected by the people. The doctor and the schoolmaster
may, or may not, live amid the scenes of their official
work. The clergyman must do so, and therefore he
commonly penetrates more deeply into the life of the
people, and knows them more intimately. He is seen
to be kind ; he is believed to be good ; he is felt to be
right. The very vehemence with which clerical faults
are denounced reveals the high standard of pastoral duty
which the people have established in their minds.
Nothing shocks the poor so much as a harsh, idle, self-
indulgent clergyman, because, in common experience,
the clergyman, whatever defects he may have of
another sort, is at least kind, laborious, and unselfish.
He knows the children by name, is almost always their
recognised advocate and friend, is constantly active to
bring into their homes some wholesome brightness, and
into their lives some pure and, apart from his efforts,
inaccessible pleasure. Wives and mothers know him as
a true friend, and, in many cases, as a loyal champion.
They seek his interference — I had almost said his protec
tion — when the disastrous plague of drunkenness has
penetrated the home, and the ties of love created at the
altar of marriage are wearing thin and threatening to
fail before that ruinous and seductive vice; and they do
G.U. N

178 CHRIST'S MISSION IN THE CHURCH.

not seek in vain. The best working-men — those who feel
the prevailing mischief of their life, and are moved to
make some effort for better things — turn to the clergy
man as their obvious and trusted ally and counsellor.
They acknowledge that the very law of his official being
is an unceasing warfare with those bold, insolent iniqui
ties which desolate their life. My brethren, I am free
to declare to you, with such authority as you will consent
to admit in one who for fifteen years has been a student
of, and for most of that time a worker in, East London,
that the best interests of the popular life are bound up
with the efficient working of the National Church in that
district Doctors and schoolmasters will not fail there,
because the State accepts the obligation of providing
them ; but with the clergy the case is otherwise. The
State declines any similar responsibility in their case,
and their provision is wholly left to the generosity of
the Christian public. To you, then, as patriots,
as philanthropists, as social reformers, as Christians,
I make appeal on behalf of the Church in East
London.

And here you will permit me to digress a moment in
order to express the deep satisfaction with which English
Christians everywhere will receive the announcement
that one who for nearly seven years has, from this
famous pulpit and in this central shrine of English
Christianity, fulfilled his ministry as a great spiritual
teacher and preacher, has been called to the government
of a large and most difficult diocese, which includes
within it problems of civic life only less formidable than
those of East London. The loss of Westminster is the

THE BISHOP OF WORCESTER. 179

gain of the whole Church, and, therefore, we cannot
allow our personal regret to isolate us from the general
joy. The seven years of various and unremitted work in
this place have not been in vain. They have added a
distinct and salutary tradition to the accumulated
memories of Westminster, and set a standard of
canonical duty which for years to come will influence
for good the life of this Society. Pardon me if I speak
the language of personal friendship. It is just seventeen
years since, as a young graduate, I made the acquaint
ance of Charles Gore, and every year since has deepened
the affection and increased the respect with which he
then inspired me. I thank God that his ripe learning
and splendid natural gifts will enrich the episcopal
bench. I thank God that the great population of the
Midlands will henceforth see in the principal seat of
spiritual authority one who commends his message by
fearless honesty, apostolic zeal, and personal sanctity.
I believe — nay, I confidently expect — that, if God in
mere)' to His Church grant strength and years, the
episcopate which is about to begin in the diocese of
Worcester will take rank in our ecclesiastical record as
in a rare degree illustrious and fruitful.

" The harvest truly is plenteous, but the labourers are
few. Pray ye, therefore, the Lord of the harvest that
He send forth labourers into His harvest." Never,
surely, did these words of Christ command weightier
.sanctions in the knowledge and circumstances of
Christians. Every year the mass of undisciplined
humanity grows on our hands ; every year a heavier
burden of responsibility is laid on the English people.

N 2

i8o CHRIST'S MISSION IN THE CHURCH.

The moral quality of our popular life reflects itself by a
swift and inevitable movement over the vast expanse
of our empire. Here at home, in the conditions under
which our people grow up, think, work, live, lies the
decisive factor of imperial politics. In the last analysis
everything comes back to this crucial matter of character.
Our traditions of civic liberty and our system of popular
government depend for their whole worth on the moral
fibre and judgment of the people. " A perfect demo
cracy," said Edmund Burke, " is the most shameless
thing in the world," and he drew the inference that a
democracy needed the witness and discipline of the
National Church. Its shamelessness would be checked
by the convictions of the people. " When they are
habitually convinced that no evil can be acceptable,
either in the act or the permission, to Him Whose
essence is good, they will be better able to extirpate out
of the minds of all magistrates, civil, ecclesiastical, or
military, anything that bears the least resemblance to a
proud and lawless domination." l

I pray you, then, in the high interest of the national
character, upon which depends the good government of
the vast populations of the empire, to exert yourselves
to maintain and extend the work of Christ's Church in
our great city. Give this day with earnest purpose and
a ready mind to this sacred cause, remembering Who it
is that laid the charge of the world's rescue on His
disciples, and therein in measure on you.

1 Vide Works, vol. iii., pp. 355, 356.

PROSELYTISING.

Preached on the l^th Sunday after Trinity, November 17 ///, 1901,
in Westminster Abbey.

WOE UNTO YOU, SCRIBES AND PHARISEES, HYPOCRITES ! FOR YE
COMPASS SEA AND LAN'D TO MAKE ONE PROSELYTE, 'AND WHEN HE
IS BECOME SO, YE MAKE HIM TWOFOLD MORE A SON OF HELL THAN

YOURSELVES.—.?. Matthew xxiii. 15.

GO YE THEREFORE AND MAKE DISCIPLES OF ALL THE NATIONS. —

S. Matthe*iV xxviii. ig.

AT first sight this anathema of Christ upon the
proselytising zeal of His contemporaries strikes us as
somewhat surprising. When He condemns pharisaic
exclusiveness, ostentation, scrupulosity, extcrnalism, and
intolerance, He commands the prompt and unreserved
approval of our consciences. But surely there is some
thing to be said for the passionate ardour with which
those zealots strove to bring men into the true Church,
to place them in covenant relationship with the true and
only God. Might it not, with plausibility, be urged that
this unwearied and ubiquitous missionary activity was
some counterweight to the gross and evident faults of
the Pharisees ? Nay, does not Christ Himself require
of His disciples the very zeal which He censures in

182 PROSELYTISING.

these Jews ? Is it not a Christian duty to " compass
sea and land to make one proselyte " ? and is that not
the assumption on which the missionary efforts of the
Church are justified ? How else in truth is Christ's
commission to be carried out in the world, and "all
nations " brought to discipleship ? It is sufficiently
evident that we ought to examine with care what it is
that our Lord condemned in the scribes and Pharisees,
and what He required of His disciples ; or, in other
words, that we should discover wherein the difference
lies between true and false missionary zeal, between
proselytising and making disciples. For we cannot
pretend to be ignorant that " proselytising " among us,
in the heart of Christendom, is a heavily-suspected
thing ; the word itself carries to the general mind asso
ciations of scandal which are profoundly humiliating,
and in common parlance it is a term of reproach.
Wherein, then, lay the guilt of pharisaic proselytising ?
Lightfoot, the great rabbinist of the seventeenth
century, whose works yet retain their value, understands
that Christ in this anathema was condemning a par
ticularly odious form of covetousness. His comment on
the text is interesting. After pointing out the con
temptuous attitude which the Pharisees maintained
towards their proselytes, he thus proceeds : —

" Yet in making of these, they used their utmost
endeavours, for the sake of their own gain, that they
might, some way or other, drain their purses, after they
had drawn them in under the show of religion, or make
some use or benefit to themselves by them. The same
covetousness, therefore, under a veil of hypocrisy, in

JEWISH PROSELYTISING. 183

' devouring widows,' which our Saviour had condemned
in the former clause, He also condemns in hunting
after proselytes, which the scribes and Pharisees were at
all kinds of pains to bring over to them. Not that they
cared for proselytes, whom they accounted as a ' scab
and plague,' but that the more they could draw over to
their religion, the greater draught they should have for
gain, and the more purses to fish in. These, therefore,
being so proselyted, ' they make doubly more the
children of hell than themselves.' For when they had
drawn them into their net, — having got their prey, they
were no farther concerned what became of them, so they
got some benefit from them. They might perish in
ignorance, superstition, atheism, and all kind of wicked
ness ; this was no matter of concern to the scribes and
Pharisees; only let them remain in Judaism, that they
might lord it over their consciences and purses." 1

The great puritan scholar was living in a time of
ecclesiastical confusion, when in all directions unscrupu
lous adventurers were using the name and pretence of
religion as the cloak of sordid self-seeking, and even
of infamous profligacy, and his experience is reflected in
the words I have read.

But I do not think our Saviour was referring merely
or mainly to such gross spiritual imposture. We have
good reason to know that the Jewish church as a whole
in our Saviour's time was inspired by proselytising
ardour. Horace satirises the zeal of the Jewish mission
aries, and Josephus boasts of their success. The witness
of the New Testament is confirmed by the contemporary

1 I'itic ll'twAx, vol. xi., p. 282. London: 1823.

1 84 PROSELYTISING.

literature.1 Christian experience, however, provides the
best commentary on the words of Christ. The history
of the Church records the rise, progress, and dominance
of the very temper which Christ condemned in the
Pharisees, and His stern language is on the lips of men
to-day, as they resent the intrusion, or strive to restrain
the excesses, of Christian proselytising: " Woe unto you,
scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites ! for ye compass sea
and land to make one proselyte : and when he is become
so, ye make him twofold more a son of hell than your
selves."

Our Saviour condemns the methods and the results of
pharisaic proselytising. The furious zeal, the untiring
persistence, the unscrupulous methods of a despiritual-
ised churchmanship which has left indelible blots on
every page of the Church's record, are gathered up in the
striking phrase, " Ye compass sea and land to make one
proselyte " ; and the miserable moral effects of such
perverted proselytising, effects which, in many cases,
seem to proceed to the length of irreparable moral
confusion, are sketched in the terrific declaration, " when
he is become so, ye make him twofold more a son of
hell than yourselves."

I have used an expression which I think gives us the
distinction we are in search of — the distinction between
a true and a false missionary zeal. A despiritualised
churchmanship is the inevitable consequence of that
external political conception of the Church which has
prevailed so generally among Christians, and always

1 The evidence is collected in Schiirer: Jcu'ish People in the
Time of Jesus Christ, div. ii., vol. ii., p. 291, f. E.T.

RELIGIOUS MATERIALISM. 185

\vith lamentable results to life and character. Our
Saviour solemnly repudiated in advance this view of
His Church. The generation to which He made His
revelation had been trained in religious materialism —
they looked for a messianic kingdom identical in essence
and form with the kingdoms of the world, and they
counted on the glory and profit naturally attaching to a
position of authority and privilege in it. Against this
religious materialism Christ continually protested. "The
kingdom of God," He said to the Pharisees, "cometh not
with observation, neither shall men say, Lo here ! or Lo
there ! for behold, the kingdom of God is within you."
And in the climax of His passion, standing before the
governor, in full view of the Cross, He reaffirmed the
great thesis : " My kingdom is not of this world. If My
kingdom were of this world, then would My servants
fight that I should not be delivered to the Jews ; but
now is My kingdom not from hence." The protest of
Christ remains on record, and we read it now as a satire
on His Church : for it is known to all men that the
Church almost at once reverted to that religious mate
rialism against which it was ordained to be the perpetual
protest. The Old Testament ousted the New. The
Christian ministry was declared the lineal successor of
the levitical ; the exclusiveness of the circumcised
nation was transferred to the baptized society ; the
language of the gospels and epistles with respect to
the subjects of the spiritual kingdom, the saints, the
believers, the elect, was boldly applied to those whose
Christianity had no other authentication than their
membership in the visible Catholic Church. Extra

1 86 PROSELYTISING

ccchsiam nnlla sains became the keynote of Christianity ;
not "Jesus Christ and Him Crucified," as with S. Paul,
or, as with S. John, the simple, stately message of Divine
self-revelation expressed and interpreted in the con
tagious love of the Incarnate Son of God.

As the Church sank into the common category of
political societies, so the methods of its expansion took
the political colour. The essential matter was to extend
the frontiers of the kingdom by the most effectual means.
The motives of surrender mattered little, so long as
surrender were secured. The cynical practicalness of
earthly statecraft usurped the name of Christian zeal ;
the warfare of the spirit was degraded into an ignoble
conflict on equal terms with rival secular politics.
Proselytising, as we understand the term, is the synonym
for unscrupulousness. If, with Christian history a lour
teacher, we were to collect the distinguishing character
istics of proselytising, we should agree that three were
invariable : (i) First of all, a thorough-going contempt
for the individual conscience. The proselytiser seeks
but one end — the conquest of men for his church ; and he
pursues it with reckless indifference to the moral injury
he may incidentally inflict on his converts. In his eager
ness to win his object he does not scruple to suggest
doubts which he cannot afterwards remove. He destroys
convictions which stand in his way, but at the cost of
character. He brings his convert into his church, but at
the price of his religion. Like an eager and ruthless boy
pursuing some gorgeous butterfly, he strikes so hard and
so often, that his prize is ruined in the gaining. And
then (2) inevitably, the proselytiser is tempted not

PERSECUTION. 187

merely to abuse influence which is rightly his, but also
to clutch at other influence which he has no right to
use.

Why should I dwell on the miserable fact of persecu
tion ? It has no roots in the Gospel of Christ. When
Augustine wanted to find scriptural basis for the
method of physical coercion in spiritual causes, he had
to make shift with twisting a single sentence from an
irrelevant parable. Historically, it is part of the disastrous
reflex action of the world on the Church, an evidence,
only one among many, of religious materialism. But I
shall be told that persecution is an old story, a nightmare
of the dark ages, which may well be suffered to fall
into the limbo of oblivion. Let it be granted that the
proselytiser will never again have at his disposal the
sword of the civil magistrate ; that even Roman ortho
doxy does not now believe that the Infallible Pontiff
gave a useful lead to Christendom, in respect either of
faith or of morals, when he ordered medals to be
struck and Tc Dennis to be sung for the massacre of
S. Bartholomew. Let us try to forget the murderous
ravings of the clerical press in France during the long
tragedy of Dreyfus, and assume, if we can, that the self-
banished exiles now arriving on our shores from that
country are as guileless and deserving as they say they
are. Persecution is only one form of undue influence ;
there are other forms less cruel, but, perhaps, not less
degrading, which I make bold to say are prevalent
among us. Have you never heard of the petty tyranny
of abused authority in village schools ? or of the pressure
put on working-men by Nonconformist foremen ? or of

1 88 PROSELYTISING.

custom promised or withheld to the struggling shopkeeper
as the price or the penalty of his religious behaviour ? or
of promotion in the hierarchies of commerce going by
favour of denominational interest ? or of the thousand-
and-one little iniquitous discriminations by which it is
attempted to coerce men's consciences by their interests ?
No church is guiltless in this matter. And I am sure
the Church of England, justly considered, is not specially
guilty ; but in its measure it is guilty too, and we must
face the fact. Undue influence in all its forms, from
the extreme outrage of persecution to the possibly
well-intentioned pressure of kindly folk, may exist,
and has existed, under other conditions ; but I am
very sure that the materialised conception of the Church
which inspires the proselytising condemned by Christ
has been in the past, and is now, its most fruitful and
persistent condition. Historically, it is certain that the
readiness to coerce into submission has been the invari
able mark of the proselytiser ; and the result may be
stated in the striking sentence of Walter Bagehot :
" Persecution in intellectual countries produces a super
ficial conformity, but also underneath an intense,
incessant, implacable doubt."1

(3) Once more, the proselytiser always magnifies the
official aspects of the church. He exaggerates the
virtue of sacraments, and exalts the powers of the
hierarchy ; he is relentlessly orthodox, and his doctrine
is marked by an unblenching certitude. What need to
multiply words ? I am drawing the portrait of a
familiar, too familiar, figure of our time.

1 Vide Literary Studies, vol. ii., p. 435.

COMMISSION OF THE CHURCH. 189

The scribes and Pharisees made proselytes of the
heathen ; but, as we use the word, not heathen, but
fellow-Christians are the objects of proselytising zeal.
I submit to you that this proselytising of Christians
among Christians is a profanation and an absurdity.
It breeds an endless series of mischiefs — anarchy and
undutifulness in families, divisions between neighbours,
the bitterest resentments against individuals, every
kind of evil-speaking and uncharity; and, the more I
consider the matter, the more evident it becomes to
me that not only is such domestic proselytising not
required of us, but it is even prohibited by our obligation
to " make disciples." For a fellow-Christian, however
misguided and ill-informed, is yet a disciple of Christ,
entitled by that fact to the privileges of fraternity. He
is sheltered from the insult of proselytising by Christ's
word, " One is your Teacher, and all ye are brethren."
It is of him that S. Paul wrote : " Him that is weak in
the faith receive ye, yet not to doubtful disputations.
. . . Who art thou that judgest the servant of
another ? to his own master he standeth or falleth."

Contrast with the proselytising which I have attempted
to describe the high commission which we have received.
Our Master has laid this charge upon us, basing it on
the fact of His own universal and everlasting supremacy:
"Jesus came to them and spake unto them, saying,
All authority hath been given unto Me in heaven and
on earth. Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the
nations." In other words, the very work on which He
Himself had been engaged during His ministry on earth,
of which the fruit was that company of disciples to whom

icjo PROSELYTISING.

He gave His charge, that work of drawing men to His
side, inspiring them with love for Himself, moving them
to enter into His mind, to accept His standpoints, to
share His enthusiasm, to follow in His steps — that work,
and none other, was to be perpetuated in those disciples
and their successors, so long as the world endured.
And as the work was the same, so must the methods of
working be essentially the same, and the consequences
of success. The raison d'ttre of the Church in the
world is to make men disciples of Jesus Christ ; and if
that primary and governing purpose fall into the back
ground of the Church's mind, if — intoxicated with
success, enamoured of power, self-deluded by the
manifold movement of its own life — the Church comes
to labour for itself, to make claims on its own behalf, to
judge men according to their treatment of those claims,
then it has exchanged Christ's work of making disciples
for the pharisaic work of making proselytes, which
Christ condemned. That Church may exhibit all the
conventional signs of mundane success ; it may exult in
the prosperity of its institutions, and the ubiquitous
activity of its officials ; it may proudly parade its
statistics of progress and count up the waxing number
of its converts ; its "yearbook " may grow yearly a more
substantial and amazing record ; all men may speak well
of it ; nevertheless that Church has the sentence of
spiritual death written on its brow, and Christ's anathema
resting on its pride : " Woe unto you, scribes and
Pharisees, hypocrites ! for ye compass sea and land to
make one proselyte ; and when he is become so, ye
make him twofold more a son of hell than yourselves."

CREED OF THE EVANGELIST. 191

I submit to you that the commission to make
disciples prohibits proselytising of Christians among
Christians. Extra ecclesiain nulla sains is the prose-
lytiser's creed, and the ecclesia is always his own
section of the Lord's host. The creed of the evangelist
is indeed different. S. Paul declared it when he wrote
to the Corinthians his memorable descriptions of his
ministerial work, which should be hung on the walls of
every clergyman's study, and written above every
Christian pulpit : " Therefore, seeing we have this
ministry, even as we obtained mercy, we faint not : but
we have renounced the hidden things of shame, not
walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God
deceitfully ; but by the manifestation of the truth com
mending ourselves to every man's conscience in the
sight of God. . . . For we preach not ourselves, but
Christ Jesus as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for
Jesus' sake." Across the lines of proselytising zeal
runs this searching and luminous sentence, which
invalidates the confident declarations and mechanical
certitudes of religious materialism : " If any man hath
not the spirit of Christ, he is none of His." Above
the ever-lengthening credenda of dcspiritualised Chris
tianity, prohibiting the arbitrary orthodoxies of
Christian history, and condemning the narrower terms
of communion, which the churches would manufacture
and enforce, stands this generous and comprehensive
apostolic declaration : " Grace be with all them that
love our Lord Jesus Christ in uncorruptness."

Hut we have to face Christendom as it is, not as it
ought to be. Here in England religious opinion on a

i92 PROSELYTISING.

thousand issues, some of them very important issues, is
deeply divided. There are several churches variously
governed, and many little societies hardly governed at
all, which it would be an abuse of language to call
churches, and which could hardly provide an adequate
and wholesome discipline, moral and intellectual, for
any Christian. It cannot but be the case that, as men
grow to their mental and spiritual maturity, they should
demand and seek a satisfying and satisfactory fellow
ship with their religious kindred. There will be a
movement from the inferior to the superior societies of
Christians. Is not that movement as legitimate as it is
natural and salutary? How, then, can the churches
avoid the necessity of proselytising among Christians ?
My answer is twofold. On the one hand, frankly
admitting the lamentable facts, and confessing that
much which in itself is evil must be endured in an
abnormal and diseased state of the Church, I allow
the rightfulness and indeed the necessity of accepting to
membership those who in conscience are moved to leave
the religious denomination in which they have been
bred up. S. Paul's principle applies in such cases, " Let
each man be fully assured in his own mind." On the
other hand, I would deprecate all direct and conscious
proselytising action ; I would habitually centre attention
on the essential fact of a disciplcship to one Divine
Master, which is certainly, apparently, admittedly, com
patible with membership in most, perhaps in all, the
sects and denominations which bear His Name. Nor is
that all, though that is much. I believe the time is ripe
for a further step, which, as you all know, I stand here

THE PRESENT SITUATION. 193

to advocate and defend. The time has come for the
National Church to enter into a federation of fraternity,
necessarily expressed by inter-communion, with all the
ordered and orthodox non -episcopal churches. With
the episcopal churches of Rome and the East, as I
understand the situation, we are already potentially in
communion, for \ve recognize them as true churches of
Christ, openly profess our desire for fraternal relations
with them, and are only restrained therefrom by the
exclusive attitude which they maintain. I believe that
in an atmosphere of genuine Christian fraternity, based
on the common discipleship to one Divine Lord and
Master, expressed in common reception of the Holy
Communion, and tested in a hundred blessed co-opera
tions, the less worthy understandings of His service
and the unwholesome separatism which they inspire and
sustain, would lose their hold on devout minds and
gradually die out. They owe their present strength, in
no small degree, to our irrational and mischievous
exclusiveness, and to the suspicions and rankling resent
ments which are the unfailing consequences of pharisaic
proselytising within the Christian society.

G.u. O

SUPERSTITION.

Preached on the 25 th Sunday after Trinity, N(n>ember i&,th, 1901,
in Westminster Abbey.

WOE UNTO YOU, SCRIBES AND PHARISEES, HYPOCRITES ! FOR YE
TITHE MINT AND ANISE AND CUMMIN, AND HAVE LEFT UNDONE THE
WEIGHTIER MATTERS OF THE LAW, JUDGMENT AND MERCY, AND
FAITH : BUT THESE YE OUGHT TO HAVE DONE, AND NOT TO HAVE
LEFT THE OTHER UNDONE. YE BLIND GUIDES, WHICH STRAIN-
OUT THE GNAT, AND SWALLOW THE CAMEL. — S. Matthew Xxiii.
23-24.

WILLIAM LAW, the famous Nonjuring mystic of the
eighteenth century, was wont to press the sinister
resemblance between the Jewish Church, against which
Christ launched His anathemas, and the Church which
claimed for itself the name and commission of Christ.
" This sect of the Pharisees," he says, " did not cease
with the Jewish Church ; it only lost its old name ; it is
still in being and springs now in the same manner from
the gospel, as it did then from the law ; it has the same
place, lives the same life, does the same work, minds the
same things, has the same goodness at heart, has the
same religious honour and claim to piety in the
Christian as it had in the Jewish Church : and as much
mistakes the depths of the mystery of the Gospel, as
that sect mistook the mystery signified by the letter of

THE FAULT OF THE PHARISEES. 195

the law and the prophets."1 William Law did but
follow the general practice of religious men chafing
under the pharisaism of the Church, and I place his
words at the beginning of my sermon in order to
explain, and in some sense justify, the choice of
Christ's censure on pharisaic superstition, as the text
of a discourse addressed to Christians. The super
stition of these Jews consisted not in their religious
practice, which our Saviour approved, but in their
perverted sense of moral proportion, which permitted
them to be at once punctilious about the perform
ance of ceremonial duties, and neglectful of moral
dispositions. The tithing of herbs was no part of
Mosaic law, but an ordinance of the rabbis, a pious
custom which had received ecclesiastical sanction, part
of " the tradition of the elders." Christ does not there
fore condemn it, or authorize its neglect. " These ye
ought to have done," He said, illustrating thus the
respect which He commanded, and in His own con
duct displayed, towards the constituted ecclesiastical
authorities. " The scribes and the Pharisees sit on
Moses' seat : all things therefore whatsoever they bid
you, these do and observe ; but do not ye after their
works ; for they say and do not." It is a common
assumption, but not on that account the less unwarrant
able, that a reverent solicitude about religious ceremonial
and discipline is necessarily superstitious ; it is well
therefore to notice that Christ definitely approved the
tithing of mint and anise and cummin, and based His
censure on a temper of moral obtuseness which is as

1 Vuie Works, vol. ix. p. 186.

U 2

196 SUPERSTITION.

compatible with the utmost puritanic severity as with
punctilious Catholic traditionalism. Thorndike was
entitled to ask of his religious opponents, who
denounced the system of the Church of England as
superstitious and unauthorised of God, " May there
not be superstition and will-worship in abhorring as
well as in observing human constitutions?"1 Are there
not many vehement zealots among us, who claim for
themselves an exceptional ardour against superstition,
to whom Bacon's protest against the superstition of re
action may well be commended ? " There is a super
stition in avoiding superstition, when men think to do
best if they go furthest from the superstition formerly
received ; therefore care would be had that (as it fareth
in ill purgings) the good be not taken away with the
bad, which commonly is done when the people is the
reformer." 2

It is clear that care is necessary if we would rightly
distinguish the guilty superstition which Christ con
demned, from the conventional and sometimes harmless
religious phenomena which are vulgarly described as
superstitious. A sentence of Richard Hooker will
indicate for us the essential character of superstition.
"Superstition is, when things are either abhorred or
observed with a zealous, or fearful, but erroneous
relation to God."3 We are led to the doctrine about
God which superstition implies. That doctrine is
essentially either non-moral or immoral, and expresses

1 Vide Works, I. ii. p. 531. Library of Anglo-Catholic Theology.
a Vide Essays, p. 122, ed. Reynolds.
3 Vide Eccles. Pol., bk. v. ch. iii. 2.

MISCHIEFS OF SUPERSTITION. 197

itself inevitably in fatuous or demoralizing religious
observances. Hence the long train of miserable con
sequences historically associated with superstition :
tantum religio potuit suadere malorum^ That bitter
thought was suggested by the excesses of non-Christian
fanaticism, but the Roman poet would not have written
otherwise had he lived in our own time. Nay, whole
chapters of Christian history are little more than illus
trations of the words of Lucretius.

Appalled by the havoc of superstition, even religious
men, both in ancient and modern times, have considered
atheism itself a lesser evil. " Atheism leaves a man
to sense, to philosophy, to natural piety, to laws, to
reputation; all which may be guides to an outward
moral virtue, though religion were not : but superstition
dismounts all these, and erecteth an absolute monarchy
in the minds of men." - Channing was right when he
said that the interests of morality were concerned in
a worthy doctrine about God. "Around just views of the
Divine character all truths and all virtues naturally
gather ; and although some minds of native irrepressible
vigour may rise to greatness in spite of dishonourable
conceptions of God, yet, as a general rule, human nature
cannot spread to its just and full proportions under
their appalling, enslaving, heart-withering control." :;
Hence the Hebrew prophets held theology and morals
firmly together; as they taught a worthier doctrine
about God, so they insisted on a worthier conception

1 Lucretius, i. 101.

• Lord Bacon, I.e. p. 121.

s Vide Complete Works, loth thousand, p. 192.

198 SUPERSTITION.

of man's religious duty. They argued from the intuitions
of conscience to a supremely righteous person, from
whom those intuitions came ; and once having secured
firm hold of that cardinal truth that God is the " Holy
One," writing His commandments on "the fleshy tablets
of the heart," they made their creed the criterion of wor
ship and conduct. In a memorable passage, the prophet
Micah represents Balak, king of Moab, as inquiring of
Balaam by what means he might win the Divine favour :
" Wherewith shall I come before the Lord, and bow
myself before the high God ? " That is the question
to which religion professes to give answer. Balak
proposes the divers suggestions of current superstition :
"Shall I come before Him with burnt offerings, with
calves of a year old ? Will the Lord be pleased with
thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of
oil ? Shall I give my first-born for my transgression,
the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?" How the
suggestions grow darker as the terror of superstition
comes over the questioner's mind ! And then the
prophet makes answer in that simple, stately appeal
to conscience, which has been called by a distinguished
living teacher the greatest saying of the Old Testament:1
" He hath showed thee, O man, what is good ; and
what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly,
and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy
God ? "

Superstition implies losing touch with the first
principles of religion, and necessarily involves its victims

1 G. A. Smith in Book of the Twelve Prophets, vol. i. p. 425,
Expositor s Bible,

SIGNS OF SUPERSTITION. 199

in disastrous moral confusion. This moral confusion
reflects itself in religious practice, and then, by an
inevitable reciprocity, the religious practice reacts on
the character and understanding with ruinous effect,
until moral obliquity hardens into unalterable perversion,
and in the solemn phrase of the Gospel, " the light
that is in men becomes darkness." The process may be
recognized by unfailing tests, which Christian experience
abundantly authenticates.

I. Within the sphere of individual life and character
superstition has always revealed itself by irrational
fears, by stunted sympathies, and, too often, by moral
declension. Robert Hall, the great Baptist preacher of
the early nineteenth century, spoke the truth, and
spoke it well, when he said of superstition, that " placing
religion, which is most foreign to its nature, in depend
ing for acceptance with God on absurd penances or
unmeaning ceremonies, it resigns the understanding
to ignorance and the heart to insensibility."1 Christian
experience, both in ancient and modern times, bears
witness to the mental misery caused by this religious
disease. It has its raw material, if I ma}' use that
homely phrase, in that fear which is deeply implanted
in our nature, and which finds its justification in our
weakness and folly. A sacred writer tells us that " fear
is nothing else but a surrender of the succours which
reason offereth,"2 and, indeed, there is no sentiment more
unfavourable to mental and moral health than the
sentiment of fear ; but there is none which more easily

1 Vide Works, vol. iii. p. 360.
8 Vide Wisdom xvii. 12.

200 SUPERSTITION.

conquers the mind, possessed by an unworthy concep
tion of God. Richard Hooker's balanced judgment
seems to distinguish the use and the peril of religious
fear : " Fear is a good solicitor to devotion. Howbeit,
sith fear in this kind doth grow from an apprehension
of Deity endued with irresistible power to hurt, and is
of all affections (anger exceptcd) the unaptest to admit
any conference with reason . . . therefore except men
know beforehand what manner of service pleaseth
God while they are fearful they try all things which
fancy offereth. Many there are who never think on
God but when they are in extremity of fear, and then,
because what to think or what to do they are uncertain,
perplexity not suffering them to be idle, they think and
do as it were in a phrensy they know not what." ] We
recall inevitably S. John's repudiation of fear, as
essentially incompatible with the faith of the Incarna
tion. In that supreme mystery of His self-revelation,
God had made known, by the tender and eloquent
witness of a perfect human life, that He " is love," and
that He "abides in" them that love. Christianity could
not build its authority over human souls on the pagan
foundation of fear. " There is no fear in love, but
perfect love casteth out fear, because fear hath punish
ment ; and he that feareth is not made perfect in love.
We love because He first loved us." That creed is the
enfranchisement of the human intellect from the dis
abling terrors of superstition ; it is the raising of human
character above the demoralizing coercion of a morbid
conscience. But that creed of Divine love has not always,
1 Vide I.e. p. 3 1 .

MODERN SUPERSTITION. 201

nor indeed often, maintained itself in the acceptance
of Christians. The old paganism is always coming
back under Christian disguises, and always bringing
the old consequences of unhappiness, narrowness,
degradation.

At this moment the thoughtful observer of the
Christian society, in all its branches, is faced by a
humiliating spectacle of prevailing superstition. He
might speak his mind in the very words of S. Paul as he
gazed around on the famous monuments of Hellenic
religion : " Ye men of Athens, in all things I perceive
that ye are somewhat superstitious. For as I passed
along, and observed the objects of your worship, I found
also an altar with this inscription, To an unknown
God."

When, with the Divine figure of Jesus Christ fresh in
our minds, with His words of benignant grace ringing in
our ears, we face the squalid ecclesiastical conflicts of our
time, and take note of the things about which Christians
evidently feel most strongly, and on which they are most
relentless and unyielding, I say the impression made on
us is that of bewildering contradiction, of a malignant
interchange of parts, of a strange resurrection of paganism
in disguise. Can it be that the fear-stricken devotees ot
our churches who come to us with anxious questions
which only superstition could suggest, and which every
page of the Gospel prohibits, are really disciples of the
Lord Jesus Christ ?

The terrors of superstition, however, are less ruinous
than the moral obtuseness it breeds in men. Bishop
Butler, in his wonderful sermon " Upon the Character of

202 SUPERSTITION.

Balaam," has given us the picture, drawn by a master
hand, of this outcome of superstition :

" Balaam had before his eyes the authority of God,
absolutely prohibiting him what he, for the sake of a
reward, had the strongest inclination to: he was likewise
in a state of mind sober enough to consider death and
his last end : by these considerations he was restrained,
first from going to the king of Moab : and, after he did
go, from cursing Israel. But notwithstanding this, there
was great wickedness in his heart. He could not forego
the rewards of unrighteousness : he therefore first
seeks for indulgences ; and when these could not be
obtained he sins against the whole meaning, end, and
design of the prohibition, which no consideration in
the world could prevail with him to go against the
letter of."

Moral obtuseriess is compatible with an ardent zeal
for orthodoxy : and close on the heels of superstition
follows the Nemesis of scandal. S. Paul declared a fact
which every age of Christian history has confirmed
by many miserable examples, that the " precepts and
doctrines " of superstitious scrupulosity have no real
moral worth. " Which things have indeed a show of
wisdom in will-worship and humility, and severity to the
body ; but are not of any value against the indulgence
of the flesh." Consider how strangely distorted is the
moral vision which sees in the use, or the disuse, of some
trivial ceremony a matter of cardinal religious importance,
and in disobedience to lawful authority, in calumnious
abuse of opponents, in spiritual arrogance no sin? at all.
What has this so-called crisis in the Church been but, on

GUILT OF THE MODERN CHURCH. 203

both sides, the outburst of a superstition which has
destroyed all sense of proportion in the minds of religious
men?

There is an episode in the record ol our Saviour's
passion which has always seemed to me the most
terrible example of the moral obtuseness engendered by
superstition which history contains. We read of the
Jews that "they led Jesus from Caiaphas into the palace,"
which they themselves would not enter "that they might
not be defiled, but might eat the passover." Can you
imagine a grosser exhibition of moral confusion ? Religion
and morality have wholly parted company in their minds:
it never occurs to them that, though they cross not the
polluted threshold of the Romans' law-court, they have
really passed into the fouler precincts of superstition ;
that, though they sit at the sacramental feast of pass-
over, they have returned to a worse and more degraded
bondage than that of Egypt. That episode of our
Master's passion was symbolic of much, prophetic of
much. When we honestly face the facts of our religious
life, our ready acquiescence in admitted social evils,
our facile condonation of class pride, of mercantile
fraud, of political dishonesty, our tyrannous insistence on
our own " rights," our brutal contempt of the ignorant and
simple, our miserable jealousies, our God-dishonouring
extcrnalism, can we avoid the full and direct censure of
Christ's anathema falling as justly on us as on those
proud churchmen who first provoked it ? " Woe unto you,
scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites ! for ye tithe mint and
anise and cummin, ar.d have left undone the weightier
matters of the law, judgment and mercy, and faith : but

204 SUPERSTITION.

these ye ought to have done, and not to have left the
other undone. Ye blind guides, which strain out the
gnat, and swallow the camel."

2. There is one result of superstition to which I must
ask your particular attention, because it directly concerns
the main purpose of my preaching. Excessive exter-
nalism, irrational asceticism, the blunting of conscience,
intellectual deaclness — a false moral perspective — these
are not merely so many wounds on individual character,
but they, as we have already pointed out, colour and
direct individual conduct. They tend always towards
ecclesiastical disruption, because by obscuring, and
indeed obliterating, the dividing line between the essential
and the indifferent, they multiply pseudo-essentials, and
manufacture the occasions of historic schism. The ques
tion I desire to propound, the answer to which I hold it
my duty to press for, is this : How far is superstition, not
in the past, but in the present, responsible for our
unhappy divisions ? — or, to express the same inquiry in
other words, When we seriously and responsibly examine
the actual points which now part us from those whom we
cannot but admit to be fellow-Christians, how many of
them can sustain the character of essentials ? Are we,
or are we not, insisting upon terms of communion which
are not authorised by Christ ? At least, it must be
admitted that if we now require as essential what
formerly was not essential, we are acting superstitiously.
I notice that in a recently-published volume one of the
most learned of English prelates, Bishop Wordsworth
of Salisbury, states that " the fundamental institutions
of the Church " are the " one Bible everywhere received

CHRISTIAN ESSENTIALS. 205

in the Church, one creed, one weekly holy day, one
baptism, and one Eucharist," and follows the lead of that
illustrious prelate, Bishop Lightfoot, in regarding epis
copacy as the result of "a general tendency to a
monarchical regimen," but "not everywhere set up in
exactly the same form or at the same date."1

If those were the essential terms of Christian com
munion in the second century, they must still retain that
character : no fresh revelation has been given in the
interval authorising additions to the list. The Church
acts still by virtue of the old commission. If the first
generations of Christians admitted a variety of govern
ment, some churches, as those of Rome, Corinth, and
Alexandria, remaining for a longer or shorter period
presbyterian, some, as those of Asia Minor, becoming
even within the apostolic age, episcopal, and yet main
tained the fellowship of the Church unbroken, there can
be no reason, in the domain of essential Christian prin
ciple, why episcopal government should now be insisted
on as the necessary basis of Christian unity.

In a later sermon of our course we shall have to consider
at length the character and functions of the Christian
ministry : at present I only make this brief reference in
order to indicate the practical and far-reaching conse
quences which would follow from the conclusion that the
particular form of the ministry belonged to the class of
non-essentials.

Once more, I submit that it is grossly superstitious
so to hold traditional doctrine as to refuse to accept
the evident teachings of Christian experience. If an
1 Vide The Ministry of Grace, vi., vii. Longmans.

206 SUPERSTITION.

unprejudiced and careful study of our own time compels
us to admit that non-episcopal ministries are not less
spiritually effective than our own, that the sacraments
administered by them are equally with ours the channels
of those supernatural graces which create the Christian
character, that all the tokens of the Holy Ghost's
presence and action are as evident in them as in us, by
what right can we continue to exclude them from our
frank and affectionate fellowship ? Will any man,
cognizant of the facts, face God and his own conscience
with a denial of these things ? It would be easy to
collect a mass of testimonies, if there were need of
proving a conclusion which, I make bold to say, is every
where admitted outside the coteries of fanaticism. Are
we, then, to ignore this imposing demonstration of "the
mind of the Spirit" ? If Bishop Andrewes said rightly
at the beginning of the seventeenth century that he must
be blind who did not see churches consisting without
the episcopal government (which no man more highly
valued or more nobly adorned than himself), what shall
be said of those who, with the added authentications of
three centuries before their eyes, persist in refusing the
name of churches to these numerous, active, and well-
organised Christian societies ? Are we to refuse the
right hand of Christian fellowship to those whom Christ
is owning by conspicuous works of power ? Are we to
go on openly denouncing as schismatics, or quietly acting
on the assumption that schismatics they are, these fellow-
disciples of our one Master, who — when we consent to
consider them — are winning the world for Him ? Is that
not superstition? "John answered, and said, Master,

APPEAL TO CHRIST. 207

\vc saw one casting out devils in Thy Name : and
we forbade him, because he followeth not with us. But
Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not : for he that is not
against you, is for you." Thus early did the exclusive
spirit reveal itself, and thus sternly was it rebuked.
Superstition, I said, sprang from a radically false con
ception of God : it is the creature of pagan ignorance,
the haunting phantom of servile terror, the offspring and
Nemesis of a morbid conscience. It can only be
eradicated by a sound theology : it will only take flight
before " the light of the knowledge of the glory of God
in the face of Jesus Christ " : " Whensoever it shall
turn to the Lord, the veil is taken away."

If we would be protected against the creeping
paralysis of superstition, if we would gain the rare grace
of uniting strong religious convictions with a genuine
tolerance and an active charity, if we would be raised
above the petty ardours of partisanhip, and made to
outgrow the shrivelled sympathies of fanaticism, we, like
that intolerant apostle, must carry our contentions to
the Divine Master, and receive from His lips judgment
on our behaviour. We can find Him still, if, indeed, we
desire to find Him. On the imperishable canvas of the
Gospel His portrait for ever faces us, and, as we read
the sacred pages, we stand again in audience of His
voice, and behold His glory, " the glory as of the only
begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." But
more than such audience, and such vision, is the fellow
ship into which He admits us, as we yield ourselves to
His spirit, and strive to tread in His footsteps. "In His
light we see light." Superstition is the pestilential mist

208

SUPERSTITION.

which exhales from the stagnant marshes of ignorance
and error, and wraps the bases of the Mount of God ;
but on the heights of that holy hill the sunlight of
eternal love for ever shines, and the children of God
know even as they have been known. "Where the Spirit
of the Lord is, there is liberty."

THE JUDGMENT OF CHRIST.

Preached on Advent Sunday, December is/, 1901, in Westminster

Abbey,

NOT EVERY ONE THAT SAITH UNTO ME, LORD, LORD, SHALL ENTER
INTO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN : BUT HE THAT DOETH THE WILL
OF MY FATHER, WHICH IS IN HEAVEN. MANY WILL SAY TO ME IN
THAT DAY, LORD, LORD, DID WE NOT PROPHESY BY THY NAME, AND
BY THY NAME CAST OUT DEVILS, AND BY THY NAME DO MANY MIGHTY
WORKS? AND THEN WILL I PROFESS UNTO THEM, I NEVER KNEW
YOU : DEPART FROM ME, YE THAT WORK INIQUITY. — S. Matthew

vii. 21-23.

i. THESE words from the Sermon on the Mount
assume in the Speaker a character, which He habitually
claimed. No candid student of the gospels can doubt
that Christ claimed to be, in an unique and absolute
sense, the Judge of men. Whether you limit yourself,
as the manner of some is, to the synoptic narrative, or
whether you include in your inquiry the Gospel accord
ing to S. John, this result is unaffected. You are con
fronted by this stern and far-reaching claim. Christ's
language assumes for Him a judgeship, which is both
present and future, immediate in the case of every man,
exercised in some sense involuntarily by means of the
inevitable effect which His presence has on those to

G.U. P

210 THE JUDGMENT OF CHRIST.

whom it is brought, and distant, ordained to be fulfilled
at the Great Assize, when " the Son of Man shall come
in His glory, and all the angels with Him, and shall sit
on the throne of His glory, and before Him shall be
gathered all the nations." When, with the gospels
before us, we try to understand the precise meaning of
this twofold judgeship, we are at first perhaps somewhat
perplexed. The men of Christ's generation, and of
many subsequent generations, found no difficulty in
giving the most prosaic and literal meaning to His
words. They imagined quite easily the whole process,
method, and aspect of the Last Judgment, for the
unseen world was strangely near, and at any moment
the visible heavens might part asunder to disclose the
inexorable Judge. The clear-cut language of the apos
tolic writers, so singularly and lastingly impressive in
its simplicity, evidently implies a very obvious and
literal understanding of Christ's teaching. Thus S. Paul,
" We must all be made manifest before the judgment-
seat of Christ ; that each one may receive the things
done in the body, according to what he hath done,
whether it be good or bad." We remember that the
apostle was at that stage in his career persuaded that
the second advent of Christ was an imminent event,
and that it would be " the revelation of the Lord Jesus
from heaven with the angels of His power in flaming
fire, rendering vengeance to them that know not God."
Probably no passage in literature has more deeply
impressed itself on the mind of Christendom than that
in which the seer of the Apocalypse describes the "great
white throne" of the Judge, and the gathered hosts of the

THE IDEAL OF HUMANITY. 211

dead ranged before it, to receive the sentence of eternal
destiny. Printed on the memory in childhood, and
drawing to itself the fears of conscience, the word-
picture of the Apocalypse haunts the imagination of
manhood, adds terror to sickness, and darkens the hour
of departure. The undertone of life's manifold music
is always the sombre chant, " Dies ira, dies ilia." To
men trained as we are, under the influences of a time
in which knowledge is extended and faith wanes, the
simple literalism of former ages is no longer possible,
and the terrors which linger in the imagination seem to
lose their foothold in the reason of modern believers.
We cannot, therefore, avoid the question, in what sense
we are to understand the declarations of Christ ? How
is He now, and how shall He be hereafter, the Judge of
men ?

2. Perhaps we may summarise the teaching of the
Gospel with respect to Christ's judgeship by distinguish
ing three aspects of His office. He is the "Son of Man,"
and as such He exhibits the ideal of humanity : He sets
the standard of human character : His example gives
law to human life. Probably there are few thoughtful
students of His recorded words and deeds who will
dispute His moral supremacy. Consciously or uncon
sciously we all accept in Him the rule by which to
appraise the moral worth of men. We look, as a matter
of course, for qualities in a self-respecting man which —
apart from Him — would not be integral to a perfect
character. If we cannot conceive of moral excellence
apart from purity, mercy, and humility, it is to
Jesus Christ that we owe the fact. If we involuntarily

P 2

212 THE JUDGMENT OF CHRIST.

acknowledge something base in scorn, and unworthy in
pride: if with us strength necessarily implies service, and
privilege is the condition and instrument of sacrifice, we
derive our whole standpoint from the Gospel. The
accepted measure of goodness among us is, as a matter
of fact, correspondence to the model of Christ ; and in
that sense, as fixing the standard of human worth, He
is the Judge of men.

But Jesus Christ claimed to be, in an unique and
sovereign sense, the " Son of God." No efforts of honest
criticism can cut out of the Gospel that supreme and
solemn fact. Embedded in the narratives of S. Matthew
and S. Mark, inseparable from them on any sound
principle of criticism, are declarations which are not
exceeded in range and sublimity by the most charac
teristic passages of the fourth gospel. Nothing in
S. John's record implies a loftier character in Christ
than these words from S. Matthew's: "All things
have been delivered unto Me by My Father : and no
one knoweth the Son, save the Father: neither doth
any know the Father save the Son, and he to whom
soever the Son willeth to reveal Him." Those words
do not stand alone ; they link themselves on most
naturally to other utterances preserved in the synoptic
gospels, and they leave us no choice in this matter. If
we accept, as we are on all grounds compelled to do,
the substantial truth of the evangelic account of Jesus
Christ, then we are compelled to admit that He habitually
claimed to be, in an unique and sovereign sense, the
"Son of God, "and in that character, to reveal, with plenary
knowledge and absolute fidelity, the mind of His Father.

THE FINAL JUDGMENT. 213

He thus stands before us as the exponent of the Divine
judgment on human life. We can learn from Him how
God regards us and our action, what is the scale of
importance and of merit which God recognizes, what
are the principles on which God measures the worth of
men. In this sense also, as the Incarnate Righteousness
passing sentence on current society, He is truly styled
our Judge.

And there is yet another aspect of His claim. How
ever difficult it may be for us to conceive, in any coherent
and effective way, a Day of Judgment, yet two things
seem to be certain. Religion requires a final court, in
which the tangled issues of experience shall be unravelled
and decided : the human conscience insists on an ultimate
identification and enforcement of the intricately crossing
lines of individual responsibility : the general equity of
mankind demands the " Day of the Lord," in which
righteousness shall at last be triumphantly vindicated,
and the insolent tyrannies of sin be finally disallowed
and destroyed. All this on the one hand. On the other,
there is the fact standing out luminously clear from the
Gospel, that Jesus Christ not only endorsed, proclaimed,
and interpreted these aspirations, but also definitely
asserted that He Himself would be the agent of their
satisfaction, that He would have charge of that process
of judgment, and declared the range, method, and effect
of His judicial action. " The Son of man," He said, " shall
send forth His angels, and they shall gather out of His
kingdom all things that cause stumbling, and them that
do iniquity, and shall cast them into the furnace of fire :
there shall be the weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then

THE JUDGMENT OF CHRIST.

shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom
of their Father."

The earliest creed of the Church, which is now thought
by the most eminent modern scholars to have taken
shape in Rome in the first decades of the second century,
contains the declaration of Christ's judgeship, and
thereby continues the tradition of the apostles, who, in
their extant writings, make constant reference to the
same truth. The latest creeds remain in this respect
unaltered. Christianity is bound to the belief that in
someway, unimaginable perhaps to us, the historic Jesus
will bring to judgment all the human race, and pass the
sentence of absolute equity on every individual human
career.

3. From all this the consequence evidently follows
that for us, who are to be judged by the standard of
Christ's example, on the principles of Divine judgment
which Christ has declared, by Christ Himself as Judge
in the day of His final triumph, the utmost importance
attaches to our just appreciation of His witness in the
Gospel. Within the narrow limits of a single sermon it
would, of course, be vain to attempt any detailed or
complete estimate of that witness ; but it is essential for
the purpose of my preaching that I should fasten your
attention on the outstanding characteristics of Christ's
judgment. These lie on the surface of the Gospel.
Christ declared that the basis of His action as Judge
would be moral quality. He takes account of men's
words and deeds only in so far as they are the witnesses
of character. The " idle words," that is, corrupt and
corrupting words, which men speak must be brought into

THE STANDARD OF CHRIST. 215

reckoning in the day of judgment, because "out of the
abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh," and such
words reveal the "evil treasure" of a debased heart.
Conversation, indeed, is the best evidence possible to
prove the normal course of a man's thoughts, and the
habitual direction of his interest. Therefore Christ
affirms that our words, by which we must surely under
stand the sum of our ordinary talk, will have decisive
weight in determining our moral worth. " By thy words
thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be
condemned." Nothing, He taught, would be accepted
in lieu of moral excellence. He swept away with
decision the whole venerable and powerful tradition of
external religion. He " made," as S. Mark says, "all meats
clean " by His doctrine of pollution. Not ceremonial
cleanness, but purity of heart, would qualify men for the
approach to God. He declared the absolute necessity
of forgiving others if we would be forgiven at God's
hand, and in order to establish that high and arduous
truth in Christian minds, He enshrined it in the form of
prayer, which He ordained to be in perpetual use, and
to serve as the standard of all prayer. Zeal and success,
He said, counted for nothing in His eyes, if they were
compatible with unrighteousness : He would say to
those who, in the final day of reckoning, paraded their
activity and great religious achievements in His Name,
" I never knew you ; depart from Me, ye that work
iniquity." The spiritual value of all religious acts was
by Him made to depend on the motive which prompted
and the sacrifice which enabled them. The farthing of
the poor widow outweighed in His balances the large

216 THE JUDGMENT OF CHRIST.

donations of the wealthy, because while that farthing
was her whole property, their lavish gifts came from
their superfluity of wealth. In like manner, He blessed
the offering of "an alabaster cruse of ointment of spike
nard, very costly," because it witnessed to the devotion
of a courageous faith. He allowed no independent
efficacy in religious privilege, for in His view privilege
was inseparable from responsibility, and moral failure in
the privileged was doubly blameworthy. " That servant,
which knew his Lord's will, and made not ready, nor
did according to His will, shall be beaten with many
stripes : but he that knew not, and did things worthy
of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes : and to
whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be required :
and to whom they commit much, of him will they ask
the more." The time-honoured sophistries weighed
nothing with Him against the requirements of essential
piety. He refused to consider the undoubted convenience
of the temple-traffic, nor yet the fact that it was
authorised and regulated by the established ecclesiastical
authority. He seized, held up to public identification,
and condemned the essential outrage on all that Zion
stood for in the earth, the implied contradiction of the
primary meaning of the temple, which that convenient
and lucrative traffic involved. " He taught and said
unto them, Is it not written, My house shall be called a
house of prayer for all the nations ? but ye have made
it a den of robbers." His severe attitude towards the
public immoralities of Jewish society was based on, and
required by, His stern doctrine of individual morality.
He was explicit on the absolute necessity of breaking

THE STANDARD OF CHRIST. 217

with sin at all cost, and He plainly indicated that the
cost might be great. There is a remarkable metaphor
which is placed by S. Matthew in connection with sins of
unchastity, and by S. Mark in connection with causing
Christ's little ones to stumble, and which we may infer
was not infrequently on His lips ; no words could more
impressively describe the exceeding anguish which may
be involved in breaking off such sins. "If thy right
hand causeth thee to stumble, cut it off and cast it from
thee ; for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members
should perish, and not thy whole body go into hell."
His estimate of moral fault did not coincide with the
current judgment of His time. His scale of relative
guilt received no sanction from the public opinion of His
nation. He was extremely severe against respectable
sins, by which I mean sins that entail no scandal and
breed no shame, which are consistent with conventional
self-respect, and are, as a matter of fact, common among
religious people. Pride, covctousness, ostentation in
religious observances, arrogance towards the poor,
hypocrisy, and the exclusive temper — these He sternly
denounced. On two occasions He was stirred to anger :
on the one, the Pharisees exhibited the shameless bigotry
which will twist into the service of hatred even the most
apparent goodness: on the other, the apostles, filled
with official importance, drove the children from His
side. His whole conception of religion ran counter to
the established teaching of the official class, for He
summarised religion as consisting in love of God, and
love of one's neighbour : and, in the parable of the Good
Samaritan, lie taught a conception of neighbourly duty,

218 THE JUDGMENT OF CHRIST.

which made it embrace all the misery which men have
it in their power to relieve. Nothing could be more
explicit than His condemnation of every kind of pro
fessional self-importance among His disciples. " Be not
ye called rabbi : for one is your Teacher, and all ye are
brethren. And call no man your father on the earth :
for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye
called masters ; for one is your Master, even the Christ.
But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant."
In the general judgment He declared that everything
would depend on the serviceableness of men's lives. And
that the exceeding importance of this serviceableness
might never slip out of our minds, He appointed all the
victims of want and woe to be His delegates, commis
sioning the manifold wretchedness of the world to seek
the help of His Church in His Name, and He added the
assurance that the treatment which that appeal received
at our hands would be the final test of discipleship :
" The King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say
unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these My
brethren, even these least, ye did it unto Me." Such in
broad, outstanding features was the Judgment of Christ.
4. And such, I submit, ought to be the judgment of
the Church, which Christ founded and commissioned.
I do not mean, of course, that the literal circumstances
of Christ's life on earth are, as far as possible, to be
reproduced in the lives of His true servants. That
pathetic dream of an Imitatio Cliristi, which shall in that
way sustain before men the eloquent tradition of One
Who had not where to lay His Head, though He was
Lord of all, belongs, for all its beauty and nobility, to the

TASK OF THE CHURCH. 219

materializing thought of religious childhood. It is
dramatically effective, but spiritually barren. The
Church, with S. Paul, must "know no man after the
flesh," and even though, in the imperishable Gospel, it
also knows Christ after the flesh, yet now it must know
Him so no more. The whole tendency of Christ's
ministry is contradicted by the notion that the external
conditions of His life are to constitute a model for
Christian imitation. But in a deeper sense, the Iniitatio
Christi is the law of Christianity. The Church exists to
perpetuate and apply in practice the principles which in
His life He revealed and authorised. If it be the case
that the accepted and prevailing principles of ecclesias
tical life do not only not coincide with those which
governed Him, but even contradict them, then can it be
disputed that we are confronted by a situation the most
melancholy and perilous in the world ? When we pass
from the gospels to the epistles we are, I think,
conscious of an indefinable but apparent decline ; there
is a perceptible shadow on the scene, though it is
radiant still.

" But yet I know, where'er I go,
That there hath passed away a glory from the earth."

Still in the main, through ominous conflict of rival
teachers, and contending parties, and invading super
stitions, the apostolic literature holds loyally to the
judgment of Christ. The moral aspect of religion
is still supreme ; the ceremonial and official elements
are kept subordinate within the Church. " The
kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but

220 THE JUDGMENT OF CHRIST.

righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost."
The obligations of discipleship are still summarized, as
in the Gospel, in the terms of service and fraternity:
" Bear ye one another's burdens and so fulfil the law of
Christ." " Be ye therefore imitators of God, as beloved
children : and walk in love, even as Christ also loved you,
and gave Himself up for us." " Hereby know we love,
because He laid down His life for us, and we ought to
lay down our lives for the brethren. But whoso hath
the world's goods, and beholdeth his brother in need,
and shutteth up his compassion from him, how doth the
love of God abide in him ? " The help of man is still
the Christian notion of giving glory to God, and the
essence of discipleship is still a personal relation to the
Crucified. We pass from the New Testament to the
sub-apostolic writers, and we are in a new world. The
judgment of Christ is apparently fading from the mind
of the Church. Read the letters of S. Ignatius, and
marvel at the rapidity of the transition from Christ's
condemnation of official importance to an exaltation of
the bishop's authority so extravagant that, in Bishop
Lightfoot's opinion, the language, if taken literally, would
invest the episcopal office with a "crushing despotism."1
Read the epistle attributed to Barnabas, and wonder
at the contrast between its exegetic puerilities and the
strong wisdom of the apostles. And this deterioration
has continued until the Christian Church has seemed to
wholly repudiate the judgment of Christ, and to renew
before the astonished world the very features of that
ecclesiastical system which He denounced.

1 Viiic '1'lic Christian Ministry^ p. 237. I'Hlippians.

COMMERCIALISM. 221

It is literally true that the severest satire on the
Church of Christ ever penned in the whole course of its
long history is the record of its Founder's life. No hier
archy has been so proud as the Christian ; no superstition
more abject ; no zeal more ruthless ; no casuistry more
depraved ; and yet never a week, probably never a day,
has passed since the Church was on the earth without
the accusing record of the Master being proclaimed
aloud in its assemblies. It is the most amazing, the
most afflicting paradox in history.

5. Turn from the past to the present, and consider in
the light of the judgment of Christ the current practice
of Christianity. I suppose there never was a time when
Christian men boasted so boldly of their religious success.
Statistics of progress arc the fashion of the hour, and the
appeal for the support of spiritual work is drawn on the
familiar lines of commercial advertisement, and with
good reason. Commercialism has invaded the sanctuary.
The churches — here at home in our parishes, abroad
among the confused and scandalized heathen — are com
peting one against another in the spirit and attitude of
business rivals, and their methods are borrowed, not from
the Gospel, but from the exchange. Make no mistake.
This competition of the churches, in which some insanely
exult, is dishonouring the honourable name by which they
all are called, is inflicting infinite damage on Christian
character, and going far to destroy the moral worth of
Christian effort. I protest to you that I never read the
official year books of the churches, and all the kindred
literature which they represent — that ever-growing public
library of self-advertisement and self- admiration —

222 THE JUDGMENT OF CHRIST.

without hearing in my soul that stern, sad voice of Jesus
Christ, certifying as from the very Judgment Throne,
failure and rejection where we proclaim success, and
assume acceptance : " Not every one that saith unto
Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of
heaven : but he that doeth the will of My Father
which is in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day,
Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy by Thy Name, and
by Thy Name cast out devils, and by Thy Name do
many mighty works ? And then will I profess unto
them, I never knew you : depart from Me, ye that work
iniquity."

The thought of Christ's judgment ought to breed in
us a deep discontent with our present state ; it ought to
move us to anxious self-examination, to make us ready,
nay, eager to consider together, as it were in the very
presence of the Judge, the actual causes of our guilty
rivalries. I am convinced that, if but those gracious
dispositions filled our minds, we should, indeed, have
gone a great way to recover fraternity. O brethren,
when we really face the grave and growing mischiefs of
our unhappy and unnecessary divisions, here at home,
where they paralyze our work for God, there abroad,
where they neutralize our zeal and contradict our
message, can we doubt that no price short of the truth
itself could be too great, no sacrifice short of the very
principles of the Gospel could be too severe, in order
that we might at last remove this stumbling-block from
our way, and recover fraternity with one another ? On
Advent Sunday, assuredly, I may fitly address such an
appeal to you, for Advent Sunday places us in the very

THE LESSON OF ADVENT. 223

presence of the Judge. S. Paul \va.s right when he
linked together Christ's judgment and the recovery of
fraternity, and with his moving appeal I may well sum
up the lesson of my preaching : " But thou, why dost
thou judge thy brother ? or thou again, why dost thou
set at naught thy brother ? for we shall all stand before
the judgment-seat of God. For it is written, As I live,
saith the Lord, to Me every knee shall bow, and every
tongue shall confess to God. So then each one of us
shall give account of himself to God. Let us not there
fore judge one another any more : but judge ye this
rather, that no man put a stumbling-block in his brother's
way, or an occasion of falling."

THE BIBLE.

Preached on the 2nd Sunday in Advent, December 8///, 1901, in
Westminster Abbey.

YE SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES, BECAUSE YE THINK THAT IN THEM
YE HAVE ETERNAL LIFE: AND THESE ARE THEY WHICH BEAR
WITNESS OF ME : AND YE WILL NOT COME TO ME, THAT YE MAY
HAVE LIFE. — 5. John V. 39, 40.

THE subject which must claim our attention this after
noon is one of no ordinary importance, and of no
ordinary interest. The Bible represents one of the
unities of Christendom. All Christians in all ages agree
in counting the holy Scriptures as a precious part of the
Divine provision for men's spiritual wants.

It is no doubt the case that the Roman Church, in
recognizing " tradition " as equally authoritative with
the written word, has gone far to neutralize its professed
adhesion to the Christian attitude of reverence for the
Bible, yet in theory that church unites with the rest of
the Christian society in doing homage to the sacred
writings, and the reconciling influence of that theoretic
agreement was made plain by the cordial reception given
in ultra-Protestant circles to the present Pontiffs
encyclical on " The Study of Holy Scripture," issued
eight years ago. The Anglican bishops assembled at
Lambeth in 1888 proposed as the first article of possible

IMPORTANCE OF THE BIBLE. 225

agreement with the Protestant churches, the acceptance
of " the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testa
ments, as 'containing all things necessary to salvation,'
and as being the rule and ultimate standard of faith."
On that article at least, little difficulty need be appre
hended, for the non-episcopal churches have never
failed to manifest an ardent devotion to the Bible.
Chillingworth's famous dictum, " The Bible is the
religion of Protestants," is obviously open to criticism, but
it does express in a striking way the paramount import
ance which has commonly been attached to the Scriptures
among Protestant Christians. When, driven by the
force of the great reaction against the whole system of
mediaeval Christianity, men cast about for some substi
tute which should take the place of the ecclesiastical
authority which they had broken up, and the sacra
mental system which for the time they had lost, they
found, or thought they found, all they needed in the
Bible. And, truly, it is marvellous how potent a moral
influence the sacred volume has exercised, and does still
exercise, upon those who devoutly study it.

" In this peculiarly " — said Alexander Knox — " is the
wisdom and goodness of God manifested, that the holy
Scripture is so formed, as that whosoever studies, will
be almost necessarily drawn to love it ... The great
attraction lies in this, that throughout the Scripture there
is a divine magnetism fitted, by the Author of all things,
to all the deepest sensibilities of the human heart.
There is in every part of it, where instruction is intended,
a certain divine influence which induces serious thought,
enkindles holy desire, inspires good resolutions. It

G.U. Q

226 THE BIBLE.

places everywhere before us, that which our hearts tell
us is ' the one thing needful ' ; and while it instructs us
in principles, it draws by examples. But its grand
energy is the view it gives us of a Redeemer. It is in
Him we are to find the central light, where all the rays
converge."1 The philosopher Coleridge, in those wonder
ful Confessions of an Inquiring Spirit, which were his
latest and not least precious gift to the world, writes
with no less enthusiasm and a more stately eloquence : —
"In every generation, and wherever the light of
Revelation has shone, men of all ranks, conditions, and
states of mind have found in this volume a corre
spondent for every movement towards the Better felt in
their own hearts. The needy soul has found supply, the
feeble a help, the sorrowful a comfort ; yea, be the
recipiency the least that can consist with moral life,
there is an answering grace ready to enter. The Bible
has been found a spiritual world — spiritual, and yet at
the same time outward and common to all. You in one
place, I in another, all men somewhere or at sometime,
meet with an assurance that the hopes and fears, the
thoughts and yearnings that proceed from, or tend to, a
right spirit in us, are not dreams or fleeting singularities,
no voices heard in sleep, or spectres which the eye
suffers but not perceives. As if on some dark night a
pilgrim, suddenly beholding a bright star moving before
him, should stop in fear and perplexity. But lo !
traveller after traveller passes by him, and each, being
questioned whither he is going, makes answer, ' I am
following yon guiding star ! ' The pilgrim quickens his
1 Vide Remains, iii. p. 338.

INTELLECTUAL PROGRESS. 227

own steps, and presses onward in confidence. More
confident still will he be, if by the wayside he should find,
here and there, ancient monuments, each with its votive
lamp, and on each the name of some former pilgrim, and
a record that there he had first seen or begun to follow
the benignant star ! No otherwise is it with the varied
contents of the sacred volume." l

It would be an easy task to multiply such testimonies
to the unique moral influence of the Bible, but you will
rather expect me to face the fact that testimonies of
another kind are accumulating. We cannot deny or
belittle the change that is passing over men's attitude
toward that sacred volume, which Christians have in
the past regarded with Cranmer as " the most precious
jewel and most holy relic that remaineth upon earth." •
Alexander Knox died in 1831, and Coleridge in 1834;
they had passed away before the conflict between the
Bible and science, which had seemed to slumber since
the seventeenth century, again broke out. In the years
1830 to 1833 Lyell's Principles of Geology issued from
the press, and destroyed the credibility of the time-
honoured belief that the creation was a definite event in
history, bearing an ascertainable date. In 1859 Darwin
published the Origin of Species, a challenge to the
Mosaic account of the process of creation. Three years
later Colenso put forth his bold and far-reaching examina
tion of the Pentateuch. He was the herald of a long
series of books on biblical criticism, mostly translations

1 Vide Confessions oj an Inquiring Spirit, p. 69. London :
1840.
- Vide U'orks, vol. ii. p. 112.

Q 2

228 THE BIBLE.

from German scholars, but including also original
English work, which have shaken confidence in the
Bible, and permanently altered our modes of regarding
it. At least with respect to four points of cardinal im
portance, the Christian of the twentieth century will take
a new view of the sacred volume. It will be worth our
while very briefly to notice these points.

i. The traditional doctrine of Christianity assures us
that the Scriptures are inspired documents, and, though
the Church has never authoritatively decided the nature
and limits of their inspiration, yet the current belief,
expressed in Christian literature and implied in the
authoritative treatment of the sacred text, does un
doubtedly extend inspiration to all parts of the canonical
writings alike, and exempt them on that ground from
the normal exercise of the critical faculty. The words
of S. Paul to S. Timothy have been read, wrongly I
think, but not unnaturally, as applying to all the Scrip
tures of the Old Testament, and by necessary implication
to those of the New. " Every scripture inspired of God
is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction,
for instruction which is in righteousness " ; and all scrip
ture having been thus lifted on to one level, has been
treated as of equal authority. Biblical criticism dis
allows this traditional doctrine. It insists on applying
to the sacred writings without reserve the same principles
of literary and historical judgment as those which
govern the study of all other literature. It refuses to
treat the Bible as one volume, and lays emphasis on the
multifariousness of its contents. This, indeed, is no new
doctrine. Edmund Burke, in his speech on the Acts of

INSPIRATION. 229

Uniformity in the House of Commons in 1772, had
described the Bible in terms which hardly need alteration
in order to match the requirements of the present time
" The Bible," he said, " is a vast collection of different
treatises ; a man who holds the divine authority of one
may consider the other as merely human." And again :
" The Scripture is a most venerable, but most multi
farious, collection of the records of the Divine economy —
a collection of an infinite variety of cosmogony, theology,
history, prophecy, psalmody, morality, apologue,
allegory, legislation, ethics, carried through different
books, by different authors, at different ages, for different
ends and purposes." 1

The inspiration of the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah and
that of the Book of Esther manifestly is not the same in
quality. The fifty-first psalm and those terrible impre
catory psalms, which jar so harshly on Christian ears, and
surely ought to have no place in Christian worship, can
not be reasonably classed together. We perceive that
the spiritual worth of the sixty-six books of the Bible
varies almost infinitely. We are led to inquire on what
basis they have been united in one volume, and by
what authority their sacred character is vouched for.
This is the important and difficult question of the
canonicity of Scripture.

2. The traditional doctrine of Christianity assumes
that the books of the Bible have been deliberately
adjudged to be canonical by a competent external
authority — the Jewish Church in the case of the Old
Testament, and the Christian Church in the case of the
1 Vide Works, vol. vii. p. 19. 1899.

230 THE BIBLE.

Ne\v. The sixth article of the Church of England says
shortly: "In the name of the holy Scripture we do
understand those canonical books of the Old and New
Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in
the Church." How futile, for all practical purposes, this
article is may be sufficiently shown by the admitted
facts that the modern canon of the New Testament was
not definitely fixed until the fourth century or later, and
that of the books now universally accepted as canonical
some were for the most part of that long period
seriously doubted of in certain parts of the ancient
Church. The history of the canon of Scripture has
been made the subject of careful research in recent
times, and the broad results are sufficiently clear.
English Churchmen may reflect with pride that in this
department of sacred study an honourable place is held
by English scholars. The late Bishop Westcott's book
On the Canon of the New Testament, Bishop Herbert
Kyle's book On the Canon of the Old Testament, Dr.
Sanday's Bampton Lectures on Inspiration, and the
articles in the recently-published biblical dictionaries
by Dr. Stanton, Dr. Woods, and my distinguished
colleague, Dr. Armitage Robinson, will enable any
intelligent and thoughtful student to appreciate the
change which has passed over Christian thought with
respect to the process and effect of canonicity. We see
that it is scarcely true to say that external authority
has played a decisive part, for both the Jewish and
the Christian Churches in their official decisions appear
to have followed and endorsed established usage. ''The
official conclusion" of " the gradual formation" of the

CANONICITY. 231

Old Testament canon was reached about the first
century of our era. Practically, we may be sure, its
bounds had " long before been decided by popular
use." l The limits of the New Testament canon were
not finally fixed until the fourth century or later ; and
the influence which established them was less official
than personal. " The canon of the ' New Testament,'
which was supported by the learning of Jerome and
the independent judgment of Augustine, soon gained
universal acceptance wherever Latin was spoken. . . .
From this time," s*ays Bishop Westcott, "(i.e., the
beginning of the fifth century), the canon of the New
Testament in the West was no longer a problem but a
tradition. If old doubts were mentioned, it was rather
as a display of erudition than as an effort of criticism." 2
In the case of both Testaments the ecclesiastical
decisions did but ratify the popular practice, which
itself reflected the result of a gradual and unconscious
process of " natural selection."

When we go on to inquire what, in the first instance,
were the dominant considerations which commended
documents to public acceptance, the answer is not
altogether unambiguous. In the case of the Old
Testament, writings may have been admitted into the
canon or rejected from it as they presented, or failed
to present, the character of prophecy ; in the New
Testament probably the governing consideration was
apostolic authorship, either direct, as in the case of the
Pauline epistles, or indirect, as in the case of S. Luke's

1 Vide Kyle, I.e. p. 172.

3 Vide Westcott, I.e. p. 455.

232 THE BIBLE.

writings. If, however, these were the decisive con
siderations, it is sufficiently plain that no adequate
application of them was made either in the practice or
in the official decisions of the respective churches.
Criticism hardly authenticates the theory which, pre
sumably, determined canonicity. The prophetical
character of the Old Testament writings is scarcely
assured by their place in the canon ; nor is apostolic
authorship a sufficient explanation of canonicity in the
case of the Christian documents. Nevertheless the
notion of prophecy as the distinctively inspired element
in the one case, and that of apostolic witness in the
other, are suggestive and, within limits, satisfying con
tributions to a theory of inspiration, which shall justify
the traditional Christian veneration for the Scriptures
without doing violence to fact or reason. Canonicity,
moreover, as understood in the past, assumes the equal
authority of all parts of Scripture ; and it is notorious
that this assumption has governed the general practice
of theologians. It inspires the question addressed to
the candidate for deacon's orders by the bishop — a
question which is certainly felt as a hindrance to
ordination by many thoughtful men, and which I
honestly think is indefensible : " Do you un feigned ly
believe all the canonical Scriptures of the Old and New
Testament ? " and it underlies the language of the
Seventh Article, which affirms that " the Old Testament
is not contrary to the New, for both in the Old and
New Testament everlasting life is offered to mankind
by Christ," and that " they are not to be heard which
feign that the old Fathers did look only for transitory

ALLEGORISM. 233

promises." We can see that if this assumption of the
equal authority of all parts of the Bible be disallowed,
a great change will follow in the sphere of interpretation.

3. It will no longer be legitimate to accumulate proofs
of doctrine from every part of the Bible, and construct
arguments by prodigies of textual dovetailing out of
the most incongruous materials. Criticism prohibits
the indiscriminate use of Scripture, and condemns all
forms of arbitrary interpretation. Of these the most
ancient, popular, and influential is allegorism, which
can even claim the sanction of apostolic usage.
Allegorism has undoubtedly been in the past the
favourite method of interpretation, and even in the
present it obtains a wide acceptance. A modern writer
has justly observed "that the countless books written
to elaborate the principles of allegorism contain a mass
of futility such as it would be difficult to match in any
other class of literature."

Biblical criticism, moreover, largely provides a sub
stitute for allegorism as an expedient devised by
thoughtful men in order to reconcile the moral crudities
of the Old Testament with the higher morality of the
Gospel. The refinements of the Alexandrine fathers,
carrying on the exegetic tradition of Philo, are not
needed by the modern student, who is at no loss for a
natural explanation of the incidents and doctrines which
tortured the minds of pious men in earlier times. The
method devised in the interest of culture was perpetuated
by the piety of ignorance. As a method of interpretation
allegorism is indefensible, but as a means of edification
1 Vide In^e, Christian Mysticism^ p. 272.

234 THE BIBLE.

it will probably always justify itself at the bar of the
Christian conscience. It would bt difficult to find a
better description of the popular treatment of the
Scriptures even at the present time than this, which I
borrow from an epistle of S. Gregory written thirteen
centuries ago : " For as from one lump of gold some
fashion brooches, some rings, some bracelets for purposes
of ornament, so from one science of Holy Scripture
expositors by means of countless interpretations devise,
as it were, divers jewels, which all serve to beautify the
heavenly bride." l Nor could the theory of popular
allegorism be better stated than in this sentence from
the same epistle, that "in the understanding of Holy
Scripture nothing ought to be rejected which is not
repugnant to a sound faith." That is to say, that within
orthodox limits pious fancy may run riot in the sphere
of Scriptural exegesis.

It may not be denied that by means of this licence of
interpretation the Scriptures may be made a powerful
moral influence in the general life : they draw to them
selves the affections of ardent sculs : they are invested
with the spiritual beauty of devout imagination : they
gather about them a wealth of tender and precious
associations. Every student obtains from them the
guidance he seeks, for they return to him his own
suggestions : in the hands of the allegorist they are
patient of every pious interpretation. This is much, but
there is another side to the question. If the immediate
gains are great, the inherent mischiefs are greater. The
Scriptures which are distorted in one direction, may be
1 Vide S. Greg. Epist. vol. iii. No. 62.

MODERN USE OF THE BIBLE. 235

distorted in the other. Allegorism is an instrument
which can be used by the fanatical and the unscrupulous
as well as by the holy and enthusiastic. Where there are
no recognized principles of interpretation, the safeguards
of reason and religion arc lacking, and the worst
calamities are possible. Not the least service which
biblical criticism has rendered to religion is the pro
hibition of arbitrary, that is, ultimately, of dishonest
exegesis.

4. From all this it follows that the uses to which the
Bible is put by modern Christians are no longer what
they were. And here it is that our present argument
enters into the main purpose of our preaching. These
far-reaching and, at first sight, alarming changes
worked by criticism in our whole view and treatment of
the Scriptures will, I believe, be found to be ministerial
to the blessed consequence of religious peace : for the
old springs of exasperation and conflict are cut off.
Nobody any more dreams of finding in the Scriptures
the statutes by which a Christian commonwealth ought
to be governed ; and only a rapidly diminishing number
cling to the patently indefensible view that in the
Scriptures may be found either an adequate, formal
statement of Christian belief, or a detailed and obliga
tory scheme of ecclesiastical order. We are all agreed
now that there is no validity in Christian appeals to the
rudimentary and defective morals of the Old Testament,
in order to justify or excuse departures from the morality
of Christ. W7e all endorse the doctrine of Richard
Hooker as to the conditions under which the authority
of Scripture is to be recognized. The Divine wisdom,

236 THE BIBLE.

he says, has other modes of teaching, and we must be
equally attentive to all : " As her ways are of sundry
kinds, so her manner of teaching is not merely one
and the same. Some things she openeth by the sacred
books of Scripture ; some things by the glorious works
of nature ; with some things she inspireth them from
above by spiritual influence ; in some things she leadeth
and traineth them only by worldly experience and
practice. We may not so in any one special kind
admire her, that we disgrace her in any other, but let
all her ways be according unto their place and degree
adored." l

Thus the Bible ceases at length to be a source of
disunion, and becomes the basis of unity. The gibe of
the great polemical satirist of the Restoration is losing
its force :

" As long as words a different sense will bear,
And each may be his own interpreter,
Our airy faith will no foundation find :
The word's a weathercock for every wind." -

For now at length we are coming to see that " the
letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life." Christ's words
to the Pharisees unveil to us both the cause of past
blunders and the method of future advance : " Ye
search the Scriptures, because ye think that in them ye
have eternal life ; and these are they which bear witness
of Me : and ye will not come to Me, that ye may have
life." The religious claim of that mingled literature,
which is bound within the covers of the Bible, lies in the

1 Vide Eccl. Pol., bk. ii. ch. i. 4.

- Dryden, Hind and Panther, part i, 462 466.

PROGRESSIVE REVELATION. 237

fact that it has relation, more or less direct, with
the central fact of history — the Incarnation of God in
the Son of Mary. From the vantage-ground of that
supreme fact we regard the long historic process of
which it is the flower and climax, and we find ourselves
confronted by the most amazing national record of
which time preserves the knowledge. The Jewish
people, from whom as concerning the flesh Christ
came, is certified, by signs which none can mistake, to
be the sacred nation, the priest of the peoples : and the
inner meaning of its strange, long-drawn-out tragedy of
life is uncovered in its literature ; and that literature,
shaped by the normal forces, conforming to the con
ventional types, subject to temporal conditions, in no
respect exempt from the legitimate exercise of the
critical faculty, but retaining only this inalienable
character that it is the literature of the consecrated
race, and offering that as its title to religious reverence
— that literature is the Old Testament. It is the record
of progressive revelation ; it is the story of a process of
development, which found its climax, and, therefore,
finds its interpretation, in Christ. Of the New Testa
ment there is no need to speak. Its claims to our
acceptance lies in the evident fact that it is the instru
ment of all the certain knowledge we possess of the
historic Jesus. It has been the will of God to redeem
mankind in and by an historic process : we can but
bend in homage before the impenetrable mystery.
" God, having of old time spoken unto the fathers in
the prophets by divers portions and in divers manners,
hath at the end of these days spoken unto us in His Son."

238 THE BIBLE.

Too often in the past, the Bible, like the Church, has
been made an idol, and received the homage of Christian
worship, and then, both the one and the other, have
become the victims of Christian fanaticism and the
occasions of schism. The pathetic spectacle of good
men deluded by their own mistaken zeal, and led astray
by that which was assigned to be their guide to truth,
has been again and again presented to view. Christ's
contrast has been as familiar among Christians as
among Jews. On the one hand, the Divine purpose in
the Scriptures, " These are they which testify of Me."
On the other hand, the defeat of that purpose in the
students of the Scriptures, " Ye will not come to Me
that ye may have life."

But now — thanks be to God ! — there are signs of hope
and voices of encouragement. From Bible and from
Church men are turning to Him, the living and Eternal
Christ, to whom Bible and Church bear witness, apart
from whom Bible and Church have no sanctity or value,
in Whom, and in Whom alone, there is life.

APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION.

on the yd Sunday in Advent, l\\cmber l$th, 1901,
//; Westminster Abbey.

LET A MAN SO ACCOUNT OF US, AS OF MINISTERS OF CHRIST, AND

STEWARDS OF THE MYSTERIES OF GOD. — i Corinthians iv. i.

ON the Third Sunday in Advent the familiar order of
the church service directs our thoughts to the subject of
the Christian ministry, and I have chosen for that reason
as the theme of my preaching to-day a theory about the
Christian ministry, which has maintained its ground from
the third century until this present time, which has
influenced most powerfully the course of Christian
history, and which now presents one of the most formid
able obstacles to that restoration of external fellowship
among the disciples of Christ which the most precious
interests of mankind manifestly and urgently demand.
It will be my task to-day to inquire into the origin,
meaning, and perpetual truth of the doctrine of
apostolic succession, and in the process of my preach
ing I shall have opportunity to distinguish, identify, and
repudiate the perversion of that doctrine which has
commonly prevailed, and does still in many quarters
hold its ground. Apostolic succession, in the general
usage of the phrase, stands for the theory of the origin

240 APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION.

of the episcopal ministry which was developed in the
conflicts with the heretics of the second and third
centuries ; which was formulated by the organizing
genius of S. Cyprian, and commended to the accept
ance of the Church by his lofty character and masterful
personality, and which was finally established in Christian
thought and practice by the still greater authority of
S. Augustine. The theory is sufficiently familiar,
and simple. The modern bishop is held to derive his
authority through a line of regularly ordained bishops
reaching back in an unbroken chain to the apostles
themselves. This succession is held to be the sole
security we have that our clergy now possess a Divine
commission, and the authority to exercise a valid
ministry. Thus the validity of the sacraments comes
to depend on the apostolic succession of the bishops,
and a fatal insecurity is attached to all non-episcopal
ministrations. It is obvious that the whole case of a
valid Christian ministry is made to turn on the fact
whether or not the apostles instituted an episcopal
government as a perpetual institution upon which the
very life of the Church depended. " It rests," to use
Dr. Liddon's words, " upon the broad fact that in the
Church of the apostles there was an order of men, such
as were Timothy and Titus, who notoriously discharged
the apostolic functions of ordination and chief govern
ment in particular portions of the Church, and who
had been solemnly entrusted with these functions by
apostolic hands."1

The two crucial facts, then, are — first, the existence of
1 A Fa/her in C/tris/, 2nd ed. p. xix.

THE PASTORAL EPISTLES.

241

an order of apostolic deputies ; and, next, the fact of
their ordination to their office by the laying on of
apostolic hands. When we ask for the evidence on
which these facts are supported, and which by inexor
able consequence have to sustain the weight of a theory
which prohibits the recognition and invalidates the
communion of the vast majority of the reformed
churches, we are offered the testimony of the pastoral
epistles. Dr. Liddon was under no delusions on this
point. " In our own days," he said, in a memorable
sermon, " the question of episcopacy is increasingly
seen to be bound up with that of the apostolic origin
and authority of the pastoral epistles."1

Now, whatever view we may take about the pastoral
epistles, and I for one am prepared, though with
great hesitation, to accept them as genuine writings of
S. Paul, yet the most superficial student of modern
theology knows that those documents are marked by
" features which legitimately provoke suspicion," that in
point of fact they are heavily suspected by many com
petent scholars, by some, as for example Weizsacker,
rejected altogether, by others, as Harnack, regarded as
compilations based on genuine Pauline letters. I submit
to you that, even if the pastoral epistles, justly con
sidered, will support the theory in question, yet they
themselves are an extremely unsatisfactory foundation
for so tremendous an ecclesiastical claim. But do the
pastoral epistles, assumed to be genuine, really justify
the necessity of episcopal ordination ? Are either of
Dr. Liddon's inferences sound ? Did an " order " of

1 Vide i.e., p. 14.
G.U. K

242 APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION.

apostolic delegates exist in the apostolic age, or were
S. Timothy and S. Titus charged with an occa
sional and personal mission ? Is it certain that the
laying on of apostolic hands was, then, the invariable
and indispensable mode of appointing men to the
presbyterate ?

The first question suggests an anachronism, and the
last does not admit of a positive answer. The two great
Cambridge scholars whose names are "household words"
among all serious theological students, Bishop Lightfoot
and Dr. Hort, disallow Dr. Liddon's interpretations.
Dr. Hort, in that luminous and suggestive book, The
Christian Ecclesia, examines, with characteristic care, the
evidence of the pastoral epistles as to the organisation
of the Church, and deliberately rejects the notion that
the gift of God which was in Timothy through the
laying on of S. Paul's hands is to be understood of the
grace of ordination. " The context," he says, "excludes
the thought of a x^P^P^ meant specially for Ephesian
administration or teaching, to which there is no allusion
whatever." * The reference rather is to S. Timothy's
divinely-certified designation to be S. Paul's partner in
missionary work, in place of S. Barnabas. And on the
other point Dr. Hort is equally explicit : " Neither here
then (i.e., in the pastoral epistles), nor elsewhere in the
New Testament, have we any information about the
manner in which elders were consecrated or ordained
(the exact word matters little), to their office."2 No
man is infallible : Dr. Hort may be mistaken, but so may

1 Vide Christian Ecclesia, p. 186.
9 Vide I.e. p. 215.

THE SUB-APOSTOLIC CHURCH. 243

Dr. Licldon ; and when, as in this case, they differ, a
prudent man will be chary of basing anything of import
ance on the point of difference. This is the conclusion
to \vhich I would lead you. The basis in Scripture for
the necessity of episcopal ordination is insufficient. At
most the question is left open. We must make appeal
to the sub-apostolic literature.

Here we are on well-trodden ground, over which it
would serve no good purpose for me to attempt to lead
you in the brief time at my disposal. It must suffice
for me to refer you to such masterly summaries of the
evidence as Bishop Lightfoot's Dissertation on the
Christian Ministry ', originally published in 1868 as an
appendix to the Commentary on the Epistle to the
Philippians, and now, I rejoice to see, republished as an
independent work ; and the Bishop of Salisbury's new
book, The Ministry of Grace, which takes account of
such fresh materials as have been brought together
during the interval, and deals with a much-debated
subject in a very fresh and suggestive way. If you \\ill
allow me to add a word of advice to those of you who
desire to appreciate these reviews of the patristic
evidence, I would recommend you to buy a small
volume put together by Professor Gwatkin, Selections
from Early Writers illustrative of Church History to tlie
Time of Constantine. The principal passages from the
fathers of that period, which bear on our present
subject, are here conveniently collected and arranged
and printed both in the original Greek and Latin, and
in an excellent English translation. Some of you, I
doubt not, will be familiar with larger books, but I think

R 2

244 APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION.

I may safely assume of the majority of this great
assembly that, however keenly interested they may, and,
indeed as intelligent Christians must be, in the questions
at issue, yet their leisure is little, and their ordinary
reading lies in other directions. Believe me, the
decisive facts are comparatively few, and they arc
extremely well-known ; the average intelligence of any
man, sufficiently educated to appreciate reasoning and
sufficiently industrious to acquire knowledge, is not
unequal to the task of forming a reasonable judgment
on the essential question. Remember that the tradi
tional and current doctrine of apostolic succession is no
merely academic theory, which plain men may with
reason leave to the learned labours of professional
scholars, and ought in modesty to do so. That doctrine
enters into the life of nearly every English household,
for where is there a family into which our religious
differences have not entered, so that one or another
member of it is not outside the communion of the
Episcopal Church ? And if Dr. Liddon be as true as
he is logical when he tells us plainly that " the non-
episcopal communities lack participation in those
privileges which depend upon a ministry duly authorized
by Christ our Lord, and in particular, the precious
sacrament of His Body and Blood," then it is matter
not merely of evident and urgent religious duty, but of
manifest Christian charity, to leave no effort unexerted
to bring our relatives and friends out of a spiritually
fatal error.

And there is yet another reason why every Christian
man, as such, should face and decide for himself

URGENCY OF THE QUESTION. 245

whether or not this doctrine of the necessity of
episcopal consecration be true. In the name of that
"adequate seriousness " for which Dr. Liddon so justly
contended, I submit that no man ought lightly to bind
upon Christianity the burden of a doctrine, which
afflicts men's hearts and perplexes their consciences,
which seems to be strangely alien to the spirit of the
Gospel, and which certainly involves practical con
sequences of a character which no Christian can
contemplate without misgiving. Most requisite at all
times is it for us to remember Bishop Butler's impressive
warning, " how great presumption it is to make light
of any institutions of divine appointment ; that our
obligations to obey all God's commands whatever arc
absolute and indispensable ; and that commands merely
positive, admitted to be from Him, lay us under a moral
obligation to obey them, an obligation moral in the
strictest and most proper sense."1 But surely we are
guilty of no less presumption when we attribute to God
what is not His, wrapping the creatures of our own
credulity or ignorance, or even interest, with the
awful insignia of His authority. Surely there was
reverence not less than reason in the passionate protest
of the Quaker apologist: " I beseech you Protestants,
by the mercies of God and love of Jesus Christ, ratified
to you in His most precious Blood, flee Rome at home :
look to the enemies of your own house! Have a care
of this presumption ; carry it not too high : lay not
stress where God has laid none, neither use His royal
stamp to authorize your apprehensions in the name of
1 Vide Analogy, part 2, ch. i. en .

246 APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION.

His institutions."1 I charge you, brethren, not to
accept unexamined and unjudged this doctrine of apos
tolic succession, which rends our Christendom asunder.
S. Clement, the earliest of the apostolic fathers, says that
" our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that
there would be strife over the name of the bishop's
office."- Reading his words by the light of the Christian
centuries, we almost inevitably read into them a deeper
and more sinister sense than he had in mind. The
name, that is, the dignity of the bishop, not in
Clement's sense, for his " bishop " was, as in the usage of
the New Testament, still only a presbyter, but in the
sense of the later Church, has been and remains a
continual spring of strife. If we could at length
renounce that obstinate fiction of Divine right attaching
to one or another form of ecclesiastical organisation, we
should at least have secured the external condition of
Christian reunion ; so long as that barrier remains,
fraternity is a futile hope.

But it is time for me to turn to the more pleasing and,
I would fain believe, more edifying aspect of my subject.
Apostolic succession, as the title-deeds of an exclusive
hierarchy, is a fiction, but as a doctrine of the Christian
ministry, as such, it is profoundly true. And here we
may distinguish three characteristics of the ministry,
which attach to it by virtue of the fact that it
perpetuates within the Christian society the ministry of
the apostles. I. We are warned away from low views
of the ministerial vocation. We are reminded that the

1 Vide Penn, Works, vol. i. p. 750. London, 1726.

2 Vide Ep. 44.

THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. 247

Christian ministry is no after-thought, no creature of
policy, no temporary feature of the historic society, but
in and through all varieties of organisation, a divinely
ordained, divinely commissioned, perpetually obligatory
means of grace. It is no fiction, but blessed and
momentous verity, that the Christian ministry stands in
the succession of those apostles to whom Christ's
ordaining word was spoken : " As the Father sent Me,
even so send I you." The high teaching of S. Paul, so
sublime and so searching, remains unalterably true of
those who, in later ages, have been called to be
" ministers of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of
God." It is by no abuse of language, by no mere
figure of speech, consecrated by long usage, but empty
of living force, that we, also, face our fellows with the
great declaration : " We are ambassadors on behalf of
Christ, as though God were intreating by us : we beseech
you on behalf of Christ, be ye reconciled to God." The
divine commission, certified to every genuine minister
of Christ by the audible though voiceless summons of
the Holy Ghost, is certified to the Church, which he
must serve in spiritual things, and to the rest of men,
whom he must call to God, by the public official ordina
tion which he receives. The divine vocation to the
ministry is conveyed through the constitutional action
of the Christian society. What precise form that
constitutional action may take has not been prescribed
in advance by Christ ; nor, so far as we can learn, was it
determined by the apostles ; nor, as we know from the
extant memorials of the early ages, was it then every
where the same ; nor, as later experience assures us, has

248 APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION.

it permanently conformed to one type ; but, though the
forms have varied, and will vary with the changing
circumstances of men's life, yet the principle will remain
inexorably the same. There can be no Christian ministry
without a divine vocation ; and "the only evidence within
our cognizance" of that divine vocation is " the fact that
the minister is called according to a divinely-appointed
order." l The Twenty-third Article of the Church of
England justly expresses the teaching of the New
Testament, the witness of Christian history, and the
demand of right reason : " It is not lawful for any man
to take upon him the office of publick preaching, or
ministering the sacraments in the congregation, before
he be lawfully called, and sent to execute the same.
And those we ought to judge lawfully called and sent,
which be chosen and called to this work by men who
have publick authority given unto them in the con
gregation, to call and send ministers into the Lord's
vineyard." The cumbrous and balanced language of
the article shows, what the practice of the Church of
England at the time of its drafting, and for long after
wards, abundantly proves, that there was no purpose of
tying down the whole Church to the episcopal govern
ment, which, for good and sufficient reasons, the English
reformers determined to maintain. How strong those
reasons were no student of Christian history will be
disposed to question : the well-known assertion of the
preface to the ordinal — in spite of a certain, perhaps
inevitable, exaggeration — is capable, as Bishop Lightfoot
showed to demonstration, of historical proof, though the
1 Vide Lightfoot's Christian Ministry* p. 267.

VALUE OF EPISCOPACY. 249

whole testimony of history in the early ages disallows
tin- exclusive claim, plausibly but illogically based on
that assertion : " It is evident unto all men diligently
reading the holy Scripture and ancient authors, that
from the apostles' time there have been these orders of
ministers in Christ's Church : bishops, priests, and
deacons." No candid and cultivated member of a non-
episcopalian church will resent the tenacity with which
we cling to the only form of ecclesiastical order which
stands in visible connection with the age of the
apostles. No sympathetic and thoughtful man will
wholly fail to understand the enthusiasm, which found
such noble expression from the lips of Dean Church in
his great sermon on " The Place of the Episcopate in
Christian History," preached in this pulpit thirty-two
years ago. " The episcopate," he said, " has these two
things : it has a history inextricably associated with that
of Christianity ; and next, it is a public sign of com
munity of origin and purpose, and an assertion, never
faltering, of confidence in a continuing future. Other
organisations have with more or less success kept up
Christianity ; but they date from particular times, and
belong to particular places, and are the growth of special
circumstances. Only this has been everywhere, where
Christianity has been ; only this belongs peculiarly to
Christianity as a whole." l

2. The Christian ministry, standing in the succession

of the apostles, has the same essential character. It is

not, in the usual sense of the phrase, a sacerdotal

ministry, and the most unfortunate results necessarily

1 Vide Paschal and Other Sermons, p. 105

250 APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION.

followed from the early and natural transference of
Mosaic nomenclature to Christian ministers. Almost
from the first the language implied and strengthened an
utterly un-Christian way of regarding the ministry. The
late Archbishop Benson's summary of S. Cyprian's
doctrine will illustrate my point very usefully, for it was
S. Cyprian \vho not only " crowned the edifice of
episcopal power," but also was " the first to put forward
without relief or disguise these sacerdotal assumptions ;
and so uncompromising was the tone in which he asserted
them, that nothing was left to his successors but to
enforce his principles and reiterate his language." l

" For him," says Archbishop Benson, " the bishop is
the sacrificing priest. Christ was Himself the ordainer
of the Jewish priesthood. The priests of that line were
' our predecessors.' The Jewish priesthood at last
became ' a name and a shade,' on the day when it
crucified Christ. Its reality passed on to the Christian
bishop : each congregation (diocese) is ' the congregation
of Israel ' ; the election of the bishop in their presence is
made in accordance with the Law of Moses ; the lapsed
or sinful bishop is prohibited from sacrificing by the
Mosaic statute against uncleanness : his communicants
are tainted by his sin. The presbyterate is the Levitic
tribe, exempt from worldly office, debarred from worldly
callings, living on the offerings of the people, as their
predecessors on the tithes, devoted day and night to
sacrifice and prayer. So precise is the application, that
the people are to rise at their coming in pursuance of the
Levitic direction." z

1 Vide Lightfoot, /.c. p. 258. - I'ide L'yf>rian, p. 34.

THE PASTORAL MINISTRY. 251

Now this conception of a ministry, succeeding to the
sacrificial functions and perpetuating the sacerdotal
character of the Jewish priesthood, is obviously and
utterly opposed to the apostolic conception. Their
ministry was pre-eminently a "ministry of the word":
the presbyters, over whom S. Timothy was placed, were
to be specially honoured if they " laboured in the word
and in teaching." The first duty of the Christian ministry
is to cherish inviolate and constantly deliver the truth
revealed in Jesus Christ to His chosen apostles. Search
the pastoral epistles from end to end there is no trace
of sacerdotalism in them, though they are "the locus
classicus in the New Testament on the subject of the
Christian ministry." !

3. Necessarily, in the wake of faithful preaching, follows
the situation out of which the pastoral character of the
apostolic ministry arises. I need not remind you that in
both its great branches, moral discipline and the adminis
tration of the sacraments, this pastoral ministry draws
its authority from the Gospel. As a pastor, emphatically,
the Christian minister answers to S. Paul's description.
He is a "minister of Christ and a steward of the mysteries
of God." S. Peter, in a memorable passage, associates
the elders or presbyters of the Asian churches with his
own ministry, and places both in relation with the
supreme ministry of Christ Himself. It is the "locus
classicus" on the subject of pastoral duty. " The elders
therefore among you I exhort, who am a fellow-elder,
and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, who am also a
partaker of the glory that shall be revealed : Tend the
1 Viiic Gore, L'hnrch and Ministry, p. 242.

252 APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION.

flock of God which is among you, exercising the over
sight, not of constraint, but willingly, according unto
God : nor yet for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind : neither
as lording it over the charge allotted to you, but making
yourselves examples to the flock. And when the
Chief Shepherd shall be manifested, ye shall receive the
crown of glory that fadeth not away." Such is the
ministerial ideal drawn by an apostle's hand. How it
mocks selfish lives and feeble faith ! Set it beside
the ministry of Christian history, of contemporary
experience, and how eloquent it is of censure and shame !
" Who is sufficient for these things ? " Who, indeed ?
Yet the Christian ministers of later ages may echo the
words of S. Paul : " Our sufficiency is of God " ; and as
we look back across the ages of Christian history, and
around on the tumultuous life of our own time, surely we
find abundant authentication of the words. Two facts
about the Christian ministry stand out with luminous
clearness. On the one hand, the incalculably great evils
which flow from its corruption : on the other, the rare
moral beauty with which it has enriched discipleship.
The necessity of the ministry might be deduced from
this circumstance that apart from its healthy working
the Church of Christ languishes, or perishes altogether.
Despise it if you will : heap ridicule upon it : deny its
claims : dispute its value : you cannot escape from the
fact that upon it depends the well-being of Christianity.
The clergy are, and always have been, the unfailing
indicators of the Church's spiritual health. What the
clergy are, that the Church will become. Alas ! that the
failures should have been so many : the scandals so gross

THE MINISTRY IN HISTORY. 253

and so obdurate ! They who bear the Lord's com
mission may well bend their heads in shame and confusion
of face as they recall the iniquities of the past, and the
treasons of the present. Again and again, by their pride,
their ambition, their rivalries, their corruptions, they
have made the Lord's people to transgress. But there has
been another side to the record of the Christian ministry.
The Church counts among the saints and martyrs many,
very many, of the Lord's ambassadors : saintly priests,
learned divines, missionaries aflame with holy zeal,
pastors who laid down their lives for their flocks, far-
sighted prelates guiding the Church in difficult times.
Nor has the apostolic succession ceased. Sometimes
from scenes of holy toil, without recognition and without
reward, as the world counts, from self-forgetting pas
torates, carried on in solitary hamlets and in the crowded
ghettos of the wretched, year in and year out under the
chilling bitterness of poverty and neglect, the splendid
devotion of the Christian ministry startles the world. No
conflict stirs about this apostolic succession of service
and suffering, for the commissioning Cross of Christ
shines apparent upon it, and everywhere men's hearts
bend in homage before it, and their consciences endorse
its claim.

HOLY COMMUNION.

Preached on the &,th Sunday in Advent, December 2ind, 1901,
in Westminster Abbey.

THE CUP OK BLESSING WHICH WE BLESS, IS IT NOT A COMMUNION
OF THE BLOOD OF CHRIST? THE BREAD WHICH WE BREAK, IS IT
NOT A COMMUNION OF THE BODY OF CHRIST ? SEEING THAT WE,
WHO ARE MANY, ARE ONE BREAD, ONE BODY: FOR WE ALL PARTAKE

OF THE ONE BREAD. — I Corinthians x. 16, 17.

THE Holy Communion is both the perpetual witness
to the social aspect of Christ's religion, and the perpetual
protest against Christian divisions. These functions of
the sacrament are not, I think, disputed by any section
of the Christian society, and least of all by the Church
of England. The liturgy constantly dwells on the
unifying influence of the sacrament. Nothing could
exceed the pathos and solemnity with which the Church
man is assured that uncharity in all its forms is deeply re
pugnant to the essential character of Holy Communion.
Take, for example, the prayer for " the whole state ol
Christ's Church militant here in earth": from beginning
to end the note of Christian unity is sounding. On the
threshold of the service we are compelled to lift our
minds above the narrow fellowships of country or
denomination, and fill our hearts with the great fact
of "the universal Church." The language seems designed

THE ENGLISH LITURGY. 255

to prohibit all conventional limitations of the Christian
name. What could be more widely inclusive than
this : " Grant that all they that do confess Thy holy
Name may agree in the truth of Thy holy Word, and
live in unity and godly love " ? We pray with absolute
impartiality of Christian regard for "all Christian kings,
princes, and governors " ; indeed, the word " all " is the
very keynote of the prayer, in which it occurs no less
than nine times. We pray broadly for all God's people;
we implore His goodness for "all them who in this
transitory life are in trouble, sorrow, need, sickness, or
any other adversity." We bless His holy Name for
"all His servants departed this life in His faith and
fear," and ask that we may have grace "so to follow
their good examples, that with them we may be par
takers of His heavenly kingdom." The exhortations
to the communicants, or rather to those who ought to
be communicants, are conceived in the same spirit. Not
a word is said about the conventional shibboleths of
denominational orthodoxy, but the utmost emphasis
is laid upon reconciliation with alienated neighbours,
restitution for injuries, forgiveness of injuries, not being
in malice, and the like ; and when the first part of the
communion service is ended, and the communicants
are summoned to come forward for the sacrament, the
same prevailing note is audible in the words of sum
mons. Here also there is nothing that divides, nothing
that alienates, nothing that calls back to mind the
occasions of denominational conflict. The appeal has
behind it the force of the general Christian conscience
in all ages, and goes home to the conscience

256 HOLY COMMUNION.

of every individual believer. Here are conditions of
communion which wake no bitterness and work no
injustice, and (such is the limitless and inscrutable folly
of Christian folk) seem to command no attention :
" Ye that do truly and earnestly repent you of your
sins, and are in love and charity with your neighbours,
and intend to lead a new life, following the command
ments of God, and walking from henceforth in His holy
ways ; Draw near with faith, and take this holy Sacra
ment to your comfort ; and make your humble confession
to Almighty God, meekly kneeling upon your knees."

I must not dwell longer on this alluring feature of the
English liturgy, but it is very requisite that I should
press it earnestly on your consideration, now that I am
trying to persuade you to see that the Holy Sacrament
is properly the witness and the cement of Christian
fellowship, and may become the sacred instrument by
which the shattered unity of Christ's disciples may be
re-created. Whatever obstacles there may be of another
kind to that inter-communion with the non-episcopal
Churches for which I have called you to labour, there
are absolutely none in the communion service itself ;
nor can there be imagined a more genuinely catholic
definition of the Christian society than that which the
communion service offers, and which was so often on
the lips of Dean Stanley. It is hard indeed to reconcile
with conventional Anglican theory, and harder still to
reconcile with current Anglican practice, the language
of the familiar thanksgiving in the Prayer-book :
" Almighty and everliving God, we most heartily thank
Thee . . . that we are very members incorporate

EUCHARISTIC HYMNS. 257

in the mystical body of Thy Son, which is the blessed
company of all faithful people ! "

When we turn from the authorized forms of Anglican
worship to the unauthorized but widely popular hymns,
which have come to hold so prominent a place in the
public service of the modern Church, we find that the
unifying character of Holy Communion is still strongly
pressed. There is, for example, a hymn constantly
sung at celebrations of the Holy Eucharist, which has
as the refrain of every verse save the last the words,
" Through this blest sacrament of unity." The first
verse is directly addressed to Christ : —

" Thou, Who at Thy first Eucharist didst pray
That all Thy Church might be for ever one,

Grant us at every Eucharist to say,
With longing heart and soul, 'Thy will be done.'

Oh, may we all one bread, one body be,
Through this blest sacrament of unity."

But, while there are many such affirmations of the
social aspect of the Holy Communion, yet, speaking
broadly, it is the case that the modern Church has to
a great degree magnified other aspects of the sacra
ment to the partial obscuring of this, which is the
oldest aspect of all. If it were needful to offer proof
of this statement, I should point to two deeply and
darkly suggestive facts — the exaggeration of the sacri
ficial character of the Eucharist within the Western
Church, an exaggeration so extreme that the reception
of the sacrament has wholly ceased so far as the
chalice is concerned among the laity, and for the rest
become for the most part of them an act of religion
G.U. s

258 HOLY COMMUNION.

performed perhaps once or twice in the year, and at
certain great occasions in life. This is one fact. The
other, testifying, as I judge, to no less calamitous per
version, is the degradation which has overtaken the
sacrament within the Protestant sphere, a degradation
which has proceeded to such lengths that all sense of the
unique and sovereign character of Christ's institution
seems to have perished from many minds altogether,
and this generation has witnessed the portentous
spectacle of a numerous and enthusiastic Christian
denomination actually leaving the two sacraments
wholly out of its organisation. I refer, of course, to the
well-known case of the Salvation Army, which officially
admits neither baptism nor the supper of the Lord.
The solitary masses of the Western Church and the
official ignoring of the sacraments among the followers
of "General" Booth unite in my view as consequences
of one and the same fundamental misconception of the
Holy Communion. Its essential character as the sacra
ment of unity has perished from mind. As we reascend
the stream of Christian history, and approach the
sources, we find this aspect of the Eucharist becoming
even more prominent. The distinctive elements of the
primitive Eucharist are all significant of fraternity. Let
me but mention five.

i. It is certain that at first "the Lord's Supper" was
a term of wider meaning than is now the case. It
included the sacred feast known even within the
apostolic age as the Agape, as well as the solemn
commemoration of Christ's death in the sacrament of
His Body and Blood. Now, the Agape was emphatically

THE AGAPE 259

an assertion of fraternity, and its intimate association
with the Eucharist was at once the evidence and the
security of the social aspect of Christ's institution.
The very name is eloquent. Agape is, as you all know,
the Greek word for " love " : and its application to the
Christian meal undoubtedly arose from the circumstance
that, at the last supper, Christ had laid on His disciples
as His " new commandment" the duty of mutual love. l
The separation of the Agape from the Eucharist was
rendered advisable by the licentious abuses to which it
too easily lent itself among the converts from heathenism.
Dean Stanley conjectured that the severe language of
S.Paul, in rebuking the excesses of the Corinthians, was
the cause of the subsequent severance of the Sacrament
from the social feast.2

More probably the persecuting action of the Roman
government compelled what the wiser Christians felt to
be a prudent course. Whatever the cause, the fact is
beyond question that " by the end of the second or
beginning of the third century the Agape, as a distinc
tive ceremony, seems to have been in vogue in East and
West alike."3

There arc few more melancholy studies than that of
the history of the Agape, unless, perhaps, it be that of
the history of the Eucharist. Severed from its associa
tion with the Sacrament, the fraternal feast rapidly
degenerated, until it has reached our own days only in
the degrading custom, still holding its ground among
our poorest people, of the funeral " wake." Severed

1 Vide Keating : Agape and Eucharist, p. 40.

'-' I 'ide Commentary on Epistles to the Corinthians^ p. 207.

8 Vide Keating, I.e. p. 163.

S 2

260 HOLY COMMUNION.

from its association with the Agape, the sacrament
rapidly lost its social function, and tended more and
more to take a mysterious, sacrificial character, which
among semi-barbarous peoples, in times of general
ignorance, fell in but too easily with deep-seated and
prevailing superstition.

2. Take, again, the apostolic custom ot giving the
11 kiss " of Christian fellowship in the Christian assembly.
"Salute one another with a holy kiss" is an exhortation
which occurs in no fewer than four of S. Paul's Epistles,
and it would be impossible to find a more emphatic
assertion of fraternity. The " kiss of peace " seems to
have found a place in all the principal religious ceremonies
of the early Christians, but "the Holy Eucharist is the
Christian rite with which it was most essentially con
nected, and in which it was preserved the longest. It is
found in all primitive liturgies, and is mentioned or
referred to by the earliest writers who describe the
administration of the Lord's Supper." l

Whether, as seems to have been the earlier practice,
the kiss was given before the consecration, or whether,
as has been the general rule of the West, it followed the
consecration, its signification was the same. S. Cyril
of Jerusalem explained its meaning to his catechumens
in the year 347 in his lecture on the mysteries, to which
by baptism they were about to be admitted.

" Then," he said, referring to the order of the

accustomed Liturgy, " the deacon cries aloud, ' Receive

ye one another ; and let us kiss one another.' Think

not that this kiss ranks with those given in public by

1 Vide Diet, of Christian Antiquities, vol. ii. p. 903.

THE KISS. 261

common friends. It is not such : this kiss blends souls
one with another, and solicits for them entire forgiveness.
Therefore this kiss is that our souls are mingled together,
and have banished all remembrance of wrongs. For
this cause Christ said, ' If thou bring thy gift to the
altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught
against thee, leave there thy gift upon the altar, and go
thy way : first be reconciled to thy brother, and then
come and offer thy gift.' The kiss, therefore, is recon
ciliation, and for this reason holy : as the blessed Paul
has in his epistles urged, ' Greet ye one another with a
holy kiss ' ; and Peter, ' with a kiss of charity.' " ]

Of course it could not last : as the Church grew
numerous and fashionable, the simple domestic practices
of the first days had to be laid aside. We know, by
many lamentable examples, how readily the innocent
liberty of one age becomes, in the desecrating hands of
unspiritual men, the scandalous license of another. I
do not recall the primitive simplicity in order to urge
its revival, but as one more eloquent token of the
character which, in those early times, was ascribed to
the Holy Communion.

3. Consider, again, the suggestive custom of the early
Church, which stands out clearly in the earliest post-
apostolic accounts of the Eucharist which we possess. I
mean the practice of sending the consecrated elements
to those members of the Church who, for some reason
or other, were absent from the general service.

"Justin tells us that it was part of the deacons' office
to carry the eucharistic elements to those who were not
1 Catechetical Lectures^ xxiii.

262 HOLY COMMUNION.

present, implying that this was done at the direction of the
president. This was not only, we may suppose, in the
case of those hindered by sickness, but as a token of love
to those who were otherwise prevented from attending;
it might be by reason of work, as, for instance, to slaves ;
it might be to prisoners ; it might be to clergy or laity
as a sign of communion." } The practice, as we know,
rapidly degenerated into gross superstition ; but its under
lying idea was essentially Christian. The words of
S. Paul express that idea with luminous terseness : " We,
who are many, are one bread, one body ; for we all par
take of the one bread." So profound!}' impressed were
those early Christians with the social aspect of Holy
Communion, that they could not easily acquiesce in
the absence, even for an adequate reason, of one single
Christian from the unifying Sacrament.

4. To the same effect was the primitive insistence upon
one celebration of the Eucharist in the local church.
The celebrated passages in the Ignatian Epistles give
extravagant and ecstatic but none the less impressive
expression to the writer's conviction that the Eucharist
is the pre-eminent bond of Christian unity, and that, if
Eucharists be multiplied in any local church, there must
inevitably follow some weakening of the sense of fra
ternity in Christ. The blessed martyr is not thinking of
the formal conditions which may be held requisite to the
" validity " of the sacrament, but he is writing in view
of a pressing danger, with his eye on notorious facts. It
was actually the case in the churches of Asia Minor that
the bishop's Eucharist was the bond of oneness, and
1 Vide Bishop Wordsworth's The Holy Communion, pp. 1 15, 116.

THE OFFERTORY. 263

separation therefrom was the effect of a schismatic spirit.
" Be ye careful therefore," he writes to the Phila-
delphians, " to observe one Eucharist (for there is one
flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ and one cup unto union
in His blood ; there is one altar, as there is one bishop,
together with the presbytery and the deacons my fellow-
servants), that whatsoever ye do, ye may do it after God." 1
S. Ignatius is not advancing a case for any specific form
of church order as against any other ; he is concerned
with combating an urgent practical danger. " Heresies
are rife ; schisms are imminent. To avert these dangers
loyalty to church rulers is necessary." And the unifying
action of those rulers becomes most evident in
connection with the sacrament of unity.2

5. Consider, further, the eloquent fact that from the
first Christians have associated almsgiving with the
Eucharist. The multiplication of ''collections" at all
kinds of services has, I fear, tended to weaken in our
minds the original witness of that association. The
" offertory " at the Holy Communion is a standing
evidence of the social aspect of that Divine sacrament.
See how the notion of fraternity everywhere emerges
from the account of the Eucharist which S. Justin wrote
about the middle of the second century. Can you
imagine a more alluring combination of reverent order
and brotherly freedom than he describes ?

" On the so-called day of the sun there is a meeting
of all of us who live in cities or the country, and the
memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets

»c.4.

" Vide Lightfoot: Apostolic Fa f hers, Part II. vol. ii. p. 396 f.

264 HOLY COMMUNION.

are read, as long as time allows. Then when the reader
has ceased, the president gives by word of mouth his
admonition and exhortation to follow these excellent
things. Afterwards we all rise at once and offer prayers ;
and . . . when we have ceased to pray, bread is brought
and wine and water, and the president likewise offers up
prayers and thanksgivings to the best of his power, and
the people assents with its Amen. Then follows the dis
tribution to each and the partaking of that for which
thanks were given ; and to them that are absent a por
tion is sent by the hand of the deacons. Of those that
are well-to-do and willing, every one gives what he will
according to his own purpose, and the collection is
deposited with the president, and he it is that succours
orphans and widows, and those that are in want
through sickness or any other cause, and those that
are in bonds, and the strangers that are sojourning,
and in short he has the care of all that are in
need." l

I do not forget that we are living at the beginning of
the twentieth century when I thus rehearse to you the
simple practice of the second. I know that we might as
well insist upon returning to the upper rooms and rude
basilicas of that distant time as press for the exchange
of our solemn, elaborated liturgies for the domestic
simplicity of that primitive worship. But I am pointing
out the fact, which everywhere Christians have forgotten,
that the fraternal spirit of true discipleship did then find
natural expression in the Eucharist, and I am leading
you to the conclusion that by returning to fraternity in
c, quoted in Gwatkin's Selections, p. 50.

THE INSTITUTION. 265

our treatment of the sacrament we shall best serve the
purpose of Christian unity.

If, leaving the witness even of the earliest church, we
turn to the sacrament itself, all that has been said
receives solemn ratification. The more we ponder over
the Holy Communion, and recall the circumstances of
its institution, and regard the associations inseparably
bound about it by the Divine Master Himself, the more
impressed we must become by the scandal of our
religious divisions. The Holy Communion comes to us
directly from the heart of the mystery of our redemp
tion, and testifies, with an eloquence which can never
lose its force, of the passion of Jesus. Act and word
combine to carry the most moving appeal for unity
which the Christian heart can receive. By unmistak
able symbols and hallowed words the whole pageant of
Calvary is brought before us. We are in presence of
that hill of infamy where

"... a stern symbol rises from the rock,
The Cross of Roman Syria grimly set,
Leafless, dim-lit in leaden-coloured dawn."

We have come to the cross, the shrine of love ; we watch
the Crucified, the Victim of love ; we listen to the seven
words, the voices of love. An apostle, keeping the
vigil of love on that accursed hill, whispers in our ears
the lesson of the tragedy : " Hereby know we love,
because He laid down His life for us." " We love,
because He first loved us." But the Holy Communion
is more than an august and tender memory, more even
than an apocalypse of the Divine love ; it is, also, a
heavenly mystery, in and through which the Incarnate

266 HOLY CjOMMUNION.

Son of God gives to His faithful and obedient servants
the energising graces of His own life. S. Paul's words
can mean no less ; not the most ardent devotion can ask
for more: " The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not
a communion of the blood of Christ ? The bread which
we break, is it not a communion of the body of Christ ?
Seeing that we, who are many, are one bread, one body :
for we all partake of the one bread." In S. Paul's view
" the Holy Communion was not only the external sign
by which the disciples of Christ might be recognized, but
it conveyed the Divine life by which the individual
disciples were united by a living bond with Jesus Christ.
It sustained the mystic union with the Lord which holy
Baptism had created. So necessarily the notion of the
mystical body, the Church, passed into the notion of
Christ Himself as, through the sacrament, bestowing
His own life-giving presence, Christians became one
body because they received one Divine life. The con
secrated elements were seen to possess a more awful
character. They conveyed to believing and obedient
disciples the very life of the Lord ; they were spiritually
His body and His blood." l

I may assume that many, perhaps most, of my
hearers are Christian folk. You are looking forward
with devout ardour to the Festival of Christ's Nativity.
Around you will gather dear ones from far and near, or
you will yourself return once more to the loved precincts
of your old home. You will, of course, take thought for
the religious obligation of Christmas. The church bells

1 I have substantially incorporated a paragraph from my book
Apostolic Christianity, p. 160.

CHRISTMAS COMMUNION. 267

will ring out their summons, the churches will be decked,
the altars made ready throughout the length and breadth
of our old Christian land. Christ's table will be spread
for His own, and His words of loving invitation will be
spoken ; and then — you know it well — this portent and
outrage will emerge : In thousands of English homes
the mention of Holy Communion will bring to mind,
not the deepest and holiest unity of all, but obstinate
divisions ; nay, in many it will by tacit agreement be
omitted as endangering the harmony of the household.
Families will break up for the sacrament of unity ; and
only reunite on the lower levels of natural relationships
and conventional festivity. Is it possible to conceive a
more piteous perversion ? Does it not degrade our
Christmas fellowship into a hollow and futile form ? I
have gained my purpose if my words shall stir in you a
profound discontent, an immense sorrow at this lament
able distortion at which we English Christians have
arrived at the end of thirteen centuries of national
Christianity. I pray that the scandal of our shattered
fellowship may be so burnt in on our consciences, as we
receive the Holy Sacrament on Christ's birthday, that
we shall pledge ourselves by solemn vow at the altar of
God to take on our shoulders the cross of this high
crusade, which battles not for the conquest of an empty
tomb, but for the re-conquest of the living temple, the
home of Christian fraternity, declared to the world
once more as at the first, and sustained in the Church
by the common receiving of the Lord's Supper by all
the Lord's people. May the oldest of Eucharistic
prayers be on our lips and in our hearts on Christmas

268 HOLY COMMUNION.

Day as we kneel at the communion rail : " As this
broken bread was scattered upon the mountains and,
gathered together, became one, so let Thy Church
be gathered from the ends of the earth into Thy king
dom, for Thine is the glory and the power through Jesus
Christ for ever."

DISCIPLESHIP.

Preached on the Sunday after Christmas, December 2<)th, 1901,
in Westminster Abbey.

JESUS CHRIST IS THE SAME YESTERDAY, AND TO-DAY, YEA, AND

FOR EVER. — Hebrnvs xiii. 8.

ESSENTIAL Christianity must be original Christianity,
Christianity as the Founder presented it, before the
distorting, disintegrating influences of history had borne
down upon it, before it had attracted to itself alien
interests, and contracted compromising affinities, Chris
tianity in the simplicity of its beginnings, in the unspotted
purity of its new birth — in a word, the Christianity of
Christ, and not the Christianity of Christendom. When
we ask what original Christianity actually was, our
appeal lies of necessity to the New Testament, and
therein, primarily, to the Gospels. In those brief
narratives, so brief that the whole of their contents
would not fill a single file of the Times, we must find
the answer to our question.

I do not think it needful to undertake any defence of
the authority which I thus attribute to the gospels.
The critical conflicts of modern times — so far as I can
appreciate their effect — appear to have established, so
far as such conflicts could establish, the validity of the

270 DISCIPLESHIP.

claim which the evangelists make to present as faithful
a version of the life of Jesus as the circumstances per
mitted. Personally, I am the more firmly convinced as
I the more frequently study those sacred narratives that
they set before us an honest history and a just presenta
tion of the Author of Christianity. What, then, do these
gospels certify to have been the character of original
Christianity ?

The answer is on the surface. Original Christianity
was a discipleship to Jesus Christ. He claimed from men
love, teachableness, self-surrender in obedience. He
offered Himself as their Friend, their Teacher, and their
Lord, and He built His expectation of their acceptance
on the impression He had made on them by His life and
doctrine. Living frankly in their midst, no distant figure
girt with a halo of romance, but a familiar object in their
daily experience, " the Son of Man came eating and
drinking," mingling without reserve in the ordinary
intercourse of human society. He invited them to study
His character at short range, to consider His conduct in
detail, to weigh His habitual conversation as well as
His formal teachings, and so to come to a decision on
His claim when in due time He proposed it to them.

The followers of Christ are in the gospels commonly
described as His "disciples." The evangelists are very
jealous of the official title given to the twelve — "apostles."
The most profound and spiritual of the four never uses
it at all ; it is most used by S. Luke, who personally
stood farthest from the history, and the term itself
expresses rather a function than an office, and the
function implies discipleship.

CHRIST'S PERSONAL CLAIM. 271

Christ adopted the familiar method of Jewish teachers
in making Himself the centre of a " school." As there
was a " school " of Hillel, and a "school" of Shammah,
so to the casual observer it looked as if there was coming
on the scene a " school " of Jesus. His contemporaries
contrasted Him with such well-known teachers, and
dwelt suspiciously on His lack of the normal qualifica
tions for the teacher's office. " Is not this the car
penter ? " they asked in scorn. " How knoweth this
man letters, having never learned ? " " By what
authority doest thou these things, and who gave thee
this authority ? " They set in contrast the well-authenti
cated position of Moses and the anomalous situation of
the new Teacher. " We know that God hath spoken
unto Moses : but as for this man, we know not whence
He is." They perceived, moreover, that the discipleship
which Christ claimed and commanded was very different
from any which their greatest teachers could command.
The personal pretensions of the Rabbi from Nazareth
exceeded all precedent. Very early in Christ's career
His hearers remarked that " He taught them as one
having authority, and not as their scribes." Reading
the gospel, we can understand their amazement. Christ
was the most egotistic Teacher known to history.
Familiarity, perhaps, hides from us the startling
character of His utterances. Take for sufficient example,
the Sermon on the Mount, which is sometimes spoken
about as if it stood in some kind of opposition to the
rest of the gospel. Consider the magnitude of the
personal claim which the Speaker of that wonderful
discourse advances. He tacitly assumes 1 1 is own com-

272 DISCIPLKSHIP.

pctence to revise the Mosaic law. The new morality
needs no weightier sanction than His mere word.
He remodels the law of marriage, declares positively
the conditions on which sinners shall receive forgiveness
at the hands of God, speaks of the heavenly Father with
an assumption of plenary knowledge, attaches an awful
gravity to the treatment which men give to His teach
ings, makes righteousness the very test of discipleship to
Himself. Deity alone can satisfy His declarations and
authenticate His assumptions.

Discipleship implied the frank acceptance of Christ's
personal claims, and the power which won that accept
ance was the power of Christ's personal influence. Our
Lord rarely argued about Himself. His self-assertion
was, for the most part, unmitigated by explanations.
Men had to face it, so to say, in its natural difficulty.
But this He did : He brought them into His own
intimate society. He made them the companions of
His daily life. He bade them know Him thoroughly,
observe Him closely, criticize Him anxiously ; and to
these ends He placed them in habitual contact with
Himself, and, on the basis of their intimate and pro
tracted knowledge of Him, challenged their verdict of
His personal claim : " Who say ye that I am ? "

But what did discipleship practically involve ?
Obviously, at the time to those first disciples, peril,
loss, temporal ruin. They did not see it. Probably if
they had seen the future that lay before them, they
would not have found the courage to respond to Christ's
appeal. They did not see it; but He saw it, and,
with frankness of perfect honesty, set it before them.

THE OFFENCE OF THE CROSS. 273

Nothing could be sterner or more threatening than the
prospect which He unfolded before His disciples. His
own rejection, passion, death of ignominy would mean
for them disappointment, opprobrium, clanger. Yet,
throughout, the note of Divine authority prevails: " He
that loveth father or mother more than Me is not
worthy of Me, and he that loveth son or daughter more
than Me is not worthy of Me. And he that doth not
take up his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of
Me."

Times would change : they did change. So far as
the world is concerned, discipleship would not involve
trouble. Would, then, the "offence of the cross" have
ceased ? Surely not, for, in truth, the least part of the
difficulty lay in the external sphere where violence is
possible. It is in our own time, out of the midst of an
ostentatiously religious society, that the cry has been
heard, so full of perplexity and anguish :

" How very hard it is to be
A Christian ! Hard for you and me."

Discipleship goes deeper than the external circum
stances of life. " Jesus Christ is the same, yesterday,
and to-day, yea, and for ever." The terms of His
service reflect His changelessness. His standpoints,
His standards of value, His judgments remain, amid all
revolutions of society, unalterable ; and in the honest
acceptance of these lies the essence of discipleship.

2. Discipleship is the abiding aspect of Christianity.
Look at the facts. Christianity, regarded from the
standpoints of the ecclesiastic and the theologian, has a

G.U. T

274 DISCIPLESHIP.

very unstable appearance. We are, indeed, very
familiar with the claim that churches and creeds do
not change. The human mind, pathetically conscious
of its own infirmity, clings desperately to the delusion of
changelessness. Persistently it claims for some eccle
siastical order or some theological system that it repro
duces faithfully the institutions and doctrines of the Divine
Founder. When the fact of novelty is too evident to
be denied, refuge is taken in the notion of development.
In this Church, or in that dogmatic system, alone must
the founder's intention be recognised. Christendom is
weary of the civil wars of Christians, in which every
banner bears the proud device, " The faith which was
once for all delivered unto the saints." There has
come on the scene the one impartial and authoritative
arbiter. Institutions and beliefs, churches and creeds,
are forced to plead before the judgment seat of
historical science. One result has been an extensive
destruction of controversial assumptions. The Divine
right of existing types of ecclesiastical order, and
systems of theology — in so far as it rests on the claim
to perpetuate the founder's original arrangements —
cannot survive the criticism of historical students. We
know now that the Church of Christ received from the
Divine Founder no rigid and articulated organisation,
that neither the faith, nor the government, nor the
discipline of the Christian society was defined in
advance ; that the apostles, to whom the task of
founding the Church was given, were assured the
presence of the guiding " Spirit of Truth," and sent out
into the world to learn by experiment and failure the

PERMANENCE OF CHRISTIANITY. 275

right methods of organisation. Apart from this appeal
to the past, our own observations might well convince
us of the futility of the claim to changelessness. Every
thing is in process of change. Even if the same
formularies and institutions are preserved, their meaning
and functions change. It is an evident delusion to
suppose that, in that way, the universal law can be
avoided. We may, indeed, successfully guard against
formal alterations of creed and system, but we cannot
take effectual measures against the silent disintegration
of time. The apparent changes do but inadequately
represent the actual alteration. Regard Christianity
from the ecclesiastical or theological standpoint, and it
seems to me impossible to escape the fear that the doom
of obsoleteness which, sooner or later, overtakes all
terrestrial organisations, will here also assert its power.
Churches and creeds, as such, have no immunity from
the law of change : but if the essence of Christianity be
not the membership of a church, nor yet the acceptance
of a system of belief, but, rather, discipleship to a living
Person, then it seems possible to hope that Christianity
may possess an indestructible life. For its " life is hid
with Christ in God."

The religion of Christ will last precisely so long as
Christ is able to command the hearts, intellects, and wills
of men. Discipleship, in the common experience of man
kind, terminates in one of two ways. On the one hand,
the disciple may outstrip his teacher, learn all he has to
teach, and advance into regions where he has no message.
On the other hand, the disciple may lose confidence in
the teacher, shake off the spell of his personal influence,

276 DISCIPLESHIP.

set himself free from his moral and intellectual control.
Can either of these contingencies happen in the case of
the Christian discipleship ? Are there any signs that
Christians have outgrown the teachings of the Master ?
Is the world growing weary of the ideal presented in the
Gospel ? As far as I can see, the evidence points in the
opposite direction. Men are doubtful and sceptical
about the Church ; they suspect and dislike the clergy :
they are impatient of theological systems : but for
Jesus Christ, as He stands out to view in the sacred
pages, as they dimly realise Him in their own best
selves, as they catch faint traces of Him in the lives
of His saints, they have no other sentiments than those
of respect and affection. In the twentieth century He
allures men as in the first, by the attraction of Himself.
" Jesus Christ is the same, yesterday, and to-day, yea,
and for ever."

3. The changes of Christianity which, at first sight,
perplex and distress us, are not only intelligible, but
even necessary, when Christianity is conceived as a
discipleship. For discipleship must always include the
notion of advance. In truth, not to advance is to cease
to be a disciple. That is the best discipleship which, as
time passes, enters ever more deeply into the Master's
mind, assimilates more of the Master's teaching, and
moves onward into a closer agreement with the Master's
character. This is certainly true of the individual
Christian. He advances slowly in spiritual knowledge,
surrenders himself more completely to the government
of the Divine Spirit, accepts more frankly the stand
points of Jesus, and so, by very gradual stages, and with

PROGRESSIVE CHRISTIANITY. 277

many backslidings, grows into the likeness of his Lord.
Not otherwise is the case of the Christian society, the
Body of Christ, the visible Church. There is through
the centuries an advance in Christianity. The resources
of the Gospel are drawn upon in the successive crises of
Christian experience. The bearings of Christ's doctrine
are slowly perceived. Every generation has its own
problems ; and in finding their solution in the Christian
revelation, every generation finds out something more of
Christ's message, and hands on the great Christian
tradition, enriched and extended. It is manifest that
there can be no finality in the sphere of organisation
and formulated doctrine, for these have reference to
conditions of life and thought, which are constantly
changing. In these respects, the past cannot give law
to the present, for the very obvious and sufficient reason
that the needs of the present are not the same as the needs
of the past, and the whole circumstances are different.

Certainly if, abandoning all formal notions of eccle
siastical continuity and all rigid theories of theological
uniformity, we regard the history of Christianity as the
long-drawn-out probation of discipleship, it seems to me
that we gather comfort and confidence. Consider what
amazing fortunes have been experienced by the religion
of Jesus. I can find no parallel in the religious history
of mankind. Christianity has mastered the two highest
human civilisations. The "seed of God" was cast into
the very midst of classical society in the heart of its
golden age : it seemed predestined to rapid extinction
or to an utter sterility. The gospel of a crucified
Messiah revolted the Jews : the revelation of a suffering

278 DISCIPLESHIP.

Deity scandalized the Greeks : the severity of its moral
demand alienated the Orientals : the homage it paid to
weakness — the woman and the child — moved the laughter

o

of the imperial race. It seemed to have at the time no
recommendations whatever. Looking back, with the
commentary of many centuries to guide us, we can see
what at the time was not seen, that, unknown to them
selves, Jew and Greek, Oriental and Roman were blindly
groping after that which Christianity was actually offer
ing. At the time, however, so extreme seemed the
aversion which the Gospel provoked, that an inspired
apostle could only describe it in the terms of an audacious
paradox : " The foolishness of God is wiser than men ;
and the weakness of God is stronger than men." Then
befell the mightiest ruin of all history, that downfall of
the Roman Empire, which has been not excessively
described as " the foundering of a world." Christianity
faced the barbarians of the North in the flush of
victory, in the exasperation of conflict. Christ's personal
influence was never more potent :

" And centuries came and ran their course,

And unspent all that time
Still, still went forth that Child's dear force
And still was at its prime."

Under its spell our rude ancestors passed and became
the artificers of a nobler civilisation than that which they
wrecked — the civilisation of modern Christendom. Pass
on to the sixteenth century, when the mediaeval church,
over-weighted with its corruptions, fell with a violence
and suddenness which shook the very bases of society.
All the time-honoured securities of Christian faith and

THE FOUNDER'S INFLUENCE. 279

morals seemed to have been finally abandoned. Yet
the ruin did not come. The New Testament, rising, as
it were suddenly from centuries of neglect, took the
place of the discredited Church tradition. The Founder
came nearer to men again, and His personal influence
refounded Christianity. The sixteenth century wit
nessed the downfall of exaggerated ecclesiasticism ; the
nineteenth witnessed the downfall of exaggerated dog
matism. We gaze with wonder at the mass of dead
literature which cumbers the shelves of our libraries, and
attests the polemical ardour of our Protestant forefathers.
In this holocaust of systems and shibboleths again the
miracle is renewed. The Founder stands out again in
more marked prominence, and draws to Himself a more
ample homage. " Jesus Christ is the same, yesterday,
and to-day, yea, and for ever."

4. Finally, it is in realising our Christian profession
as before all things a discipleship to Jesus Christ that
we shall recover fraternity. The nearer we draw to our
Master, the nearer we draw also to one another. The
two relationships are inseparable. Perfect discipleship
implies perfect fraternity. So He said, " One is your
Teacher, and all ye are brethren." Discipleship is not
destructive of church membership, only it discovers the
link of union not in any external agreement or discipline,
but in a common allegiance to a living Lord. It lies
on the surface of the Gospel that Christ contemplated
the organisation of His disciples; and the visible Church,
with its ministry, sacraments and discipline, is un
questionably His creation ; indeed, the visible Church is
a practical necessity if the mission of Christ is to be

a8o DISCIPLESHIP.

perpetuated in the world : but with all this the primary
truth remains, that the basis of union and the essence
of religion does not lie in the social organisation but in
the personal relationship.

If, as disciples, we approach the matters that now
divide us from one another, how extraordinarily petty
they appear ! The late Bishop Creighton, in his
primary charge, asserted his belief that we Anglicans
are ready to co-operate with all other Christians for
purposes which we have in common.1 If, indeed, that
be the case, intercommunion with the non-episcopal
churches ought not to be a distant or an unpleasing
prospect.

What other purpose, which disciples of Jesus Christ
have in common, can vie in importance with that of
which I spoke in the first sermon of the course which
is ending to-day, obedience to His "new commandment."
In truth, wherever Christians are forced back on dis-
cipleship, they cannot refrain themselves from confessing
their brotherhood in the Holy Communion. In front of
the heathen, the intercommunion for which I have
pleaded is already an accomplished fact, wherever the
issue is directly raised. " Yesterday," wrote that
illustrious missionary, Bishop French, " I turned my
little sitting-room here into a chapel and had ten
worshippers — prayers, sermon, and Holy Communion,
to which seven stayed, mostly Presbyterians, whom I
could not possibly exclude. These dear, good American
missionaries and professors will sit much nearer to the
Lamb at His supper table, I believe, than I shall, and
1 Vide The Church and the Nation, p. 35.

CONCLUSIONS. 281

I should blush if admitted there, to think that I had
warned them off the eucharistic table on earth." 1 Some
of us were privileged to hear from this pulpit on the
Saturday afternoons in Advent luminous and profoundly
interesting addresses on foreign missions from another
missionary bishop, a worthy disciple of Bishop French.
He spoke with generous appreciation of the heroic
pioneers of missionary enterprise in the far East — of
Xavier the Jesuit, of Schwartz the Lutheran, of Gary
the Baptist. The latter he declared to be the founder
of modern Indian missions. I do not think Bishop
Mylne will resent my repeating here a short dialogue
which we exchanged after the service. " Is it not
strange, my Lord," I said, "that the schismatic should
loom so large in your record?" "Ah," he replied,
" in the mission field we have to take a very broad view
of things." " Do you not think, my Lord," I rejoined,
" that it is about time we domesticated that broad view
here at home? " And this, in short, is the proposition
that I have defended before you in ten successive
sermons. Is it not high time for us Anglicans to bring
our formal theory into line with our actual practice, and
to make both express our genuine convictions ? That
is the question which I have offered to my fellow-
Churchmen at the opening of the twentieth century in
this great Church : that is the challenge I have thrc wn
down. I have counted the cost ; I know well that, to
borrow the words of Dr. Salmon, "when thoughtful
men are anxious to retire from untenable positions, the
uneducated imagine that a cowardly surrender of truth

' Vide Life, vol. ii. p. 273.
G.U. U

282

DISCIPLESHIP.

has been made." l I have lived long enough to know
by experience the malignant force of bigotry and the
persistent calumniation of fanaticism, but I do not
repent me of my course. My conscience is clear, my
conviction strong. I say with Bishop French, " It is
the infinite concern which I have for Christ and His
blessed truth and Church, which makes me eschew soft
utterances at some moments of almost desperation at
the way in which the regiments within the Christian
army — those who have the same devotion to the King
and His Bride — set to work righting each other and
riddling the allied ranks with grape-shot and worse,
instead of charging with one heart and soul the common
foe." And I make appeal with confidence to the
consciences of all those in all the churches which bear
Christ's honourable Name, who feel the shame and
weakness of our present state, and are ready to make
some effort and even some sacrifice, to recover the lost
fraternity of Christ's disciples.

1 Vide Cathedral and Universitv Sermons, p. 178.

BKAUBVRY, AGNEXV, & CO. LD., PRINTERS LONDON AND TOKBRIDGE